← Back to meetings

Meeting phoenix-pdf-2021-03-03 complete

2021-03-03 · Formal Meeting

Items: 64

Formal Meeting

View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Summary
This item transmits recommendations from the Mayor and Council for appointment or
reappointment to City Boards and Commissions.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by the Mayor's Office.




Page 11
ATTACHMENT A




To: City Council Date: March 3, 2021
From: Mayor Kate Gallego

Subject: BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – APPOINTEES

The purpose of this memo is to provide recommendations for appointments to the
following Boards and Commissions:

Phoenix Deferred Compensation Board/Post Employment Healthcare Plan Board

City Manager Ed Zuercher and I recommend the following for appointment:

Karen Peters
Ms. Peters is a Deputy City Manager for the City of Phoenix. She will replace Milton
Dohoney, Jr. as Chair and fulfill the partial term to expire September 30, 2024.

Maryvale Village Planning Committee

Councilwoman Betty Guardado recommends the following for appointment:

Sandra Oviedo
Ms. Oviedo is a resident of the Maryvale community and of District 5. She fills a
vacancy for a term to expire November 19, 2022.




Page 12



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
***REQUEST TO WITHDRAW (SEE ATTACHED MEMO)*** (CONTINUED FROM
FEB. 17, 2021) Liquor License - Special Event - M.U.S.I.C. Foundation of Arizona,
Inc.

Request for a Series 15 - Special Event liquor license for the temporary sale of all
liquors.

Summary

Applicant
Bradley Laughlin

Location
5410 E. High St.
Council District: 2

Function
Food and Music Festival

Date(s) - Time(s) / Expected Attendance
March 27, 2021 - 2:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. / 2,450 attendees
March 28, 2021 - 12:00 Noon to 8:30 p.m. / 2,450 attendees

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting that approval of this application is
based on criteria set forth in Title IV of the Arizona Revised Statutes and noting that
the applicant has agreed to adhere to the implementation and enforcement of safety
precautions consistent with the guidance issued by both the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention and the Arizona Department of Health Services.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 13
Page 14

To: Toni Maccarone Date: Feb. 22, 2021
Deputy City Manager

From: Denise Archibald
City Clerk �
M
Subject: REQUEST TO WITHDRAW ITEM 2 - LIQUOR LICENSE - SPECIAL EVENT-
M.U.S.I.C. FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA, INC. FROM THE MARCH 3, 2021
FORMAL AGENDA

The City Clerk Department requests approval to withdraw Item 2- Liquor License-
Special Event- M.U.S.I.C. Foundation of Arizona, Inc. from the March 3, 2021 formal
agenda. This item was continued from the Feb. 17, 2021 agenda to allow the applicant
additional time to review event details with the City work group charged with reviewing
events involving more than 50 people. Since that time, the applicant has indicated plans
to postpone the event to a future time. If approved by the work group, the item will be
placed on a future Council agenda that aligns with the new event dates.



Approved by:


Feb 23, 2021
T�Cr,F8Ae (Feb 23, 202106:28 MST)

Toni Maccarone Date
Deputy City Manager




Page 15



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Bevmo!

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 09079011.

Summary

Applicant
Andrea Lewkowitz, Agent

License Type
Series 9 - Liquor Store

Location
2370 W. Happy Valley Road, Ste. 1061
Zoning Classification: C-2 M-R PCD
Council District: 1

This request is for an acquisition of control of an existing liquor license for a liquor
store. This location is currently licensed for liquor sales with a Series 9 - Liquor Store,
liquor license.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 7, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, consideration should be given only to the applicant's
personal qualifications.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This information is not provided due to the multiple ownership interests held by the
applicant in the State of Arizona.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,


Page 16

grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Applicant is committed to upholding the highest standards for business and
maintaining compliance with applicable laws. Managers and staff will be trained in the
techniques of legal and responsible alcohol sales and service.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 17



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Ponderosa Carniceria 2

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 135427.

Summary

Applicant
Rosa Murrieta, Agent

License Type
Series 10 - Beer and Wine Store

Location
3510 W. Bell Road #D1
Zoning Classification: PSC
Council District: 1

This request is for a new liquor license for a convenience market. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit. This location
requires a Use Permit to allow package liquor sales.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 14, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the


Page 18

State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations
on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within
the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the
last 12 months for the address listed.

Carniceria Mi Ranchito #2 (Series 10)
5035 W. Southern Ave #110, Laveen
Calls for police service: 5
Liquor license violations: None

Ponderosa Carniceria (Series 10)
2340 E. Union Hills Drive, Phoenix
Calls for police service: 1
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“We have experience in liquor sale, and we are training for the liquor School.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“We are a small carniceria, for neighboorhood people, for their ease of service. The
use will not cause adverse impact like noise, & traffiking to neighborhood.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting the applicant must resolve any
pending City of Phoenix building and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with
the City of Phoenix Code and Ordinances.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Ponderosa Carniceria 2
Liquor License Map - Ponderosa Carniceria 2




Page 19

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 20
Liquor License Data: PONDEROSA CARNICERIA 2
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 3 0

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 1

Liquor Store 9 5 1

Beer and Wine Store 10 5 1

Restaurant 12 9 2


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 42.36 53.39 73.03

Violent Crimes 7.67 7.48 12.63

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 61 89

Total Violations 102 120




Page 21
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1042071 1972 85 % 6% 5%

1042072 1463 95 % 11 % 5%

1042261 949 26 % 8% 11 %

1042262 1244 92 % 0% 4%

6183001 1982 94 % 7% 9%

6183002 1444 74 % 0% 4%

6185001 2076 86 % 7% 5%

6185002 1030 25 % 27 % 22 %

6185003 860 4% 17 % 17 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 22
Liquor License Map: PONDEROSA CARNICERIA 2
3510 W BELL RD




Ü
Date: 1/22/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 23



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Heart & Soul Cafe

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 127940.

Summary

Applicant
John Celigoy, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
4705 E. Carefree Hwy., Ste. 117
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 2

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was previously
licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application was Jan. 30, 2021. However, the
applicant submitted a written request for more time.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Page 24




Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I have held positions of public trust for the past 32 years, including 21 years of active
duty service as a US Marine Corps officer where I held a security clearance from 1988
to 2016. Additionally, I served for 6 years for the City of Scottsdale as an airport
commissioner, and am a Reserve Deputy with the Lapaz County Sheriff's Office. I am
an aerospace executive with significant responsibilities for a publicly-traded
corporation.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“I am a mature, community-minded businessman, and the owner of a veteran-owned
business. I consider myself a highly ethical person, and am financially responsible for
running a business that supports local vendors and employ more than 20 employees.
The business is a local establishment that allows neighbors to gather and socialize. In
addition, the business will always support veterans and first-responders.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Heart & Soul Cafe
Liquor License Map - Heart & Soul Cafe

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 25
Liquor License Data: HEART & SOUL CAFE
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Wholesaler 4 2 2

Bar 6 1 0

Liquor Store 9 1 1

Beer and Wine Store 10 1 1

Restaurant 12 3 3


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 40.98 1.45 2.01

Violent Crimes 7.43 0.23 0.63

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 61 0

Total Violations 104 0



Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

0304023 1955 68 % 18 % 2%

6125002 1626 98 % 12 % 9%

6125003 1204 78 % 11 % 6%

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 26
Liquor License Map: HEART & SOUL CAFE
4705 E CAREFREE HWY




Ü
Date: 12/10/2020
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 27



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Bob's Market

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 09070524.

Summary

Applicant
Odette Odeh, Agent

License Type
Series 9 - Liquor Store

Location
12312 N. 32nd St.
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 3

This request is for an ownership transfer of a liquor license for a liquor store. This
location is currently licensed for liquor sales with a Series 9 - Liquor Store, liquor
license.

The 60-day limit for processing this application was Feb. 20, 2021. However, the
applicant has submitted a written request for more time.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.




Page 28

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the
State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations
on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within
the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the
last 12 months for the address listed.

Gas & Food Mart (Series 10)
1902 W. Cactus Road, Phoenix
Calls for police service: 4
Liquor license violations: In January 2014, a fine of $375.00 was paid for delinquent
taxes. In March 2017, a fine of $750.00 was paid for failure to request ID for an
underage buyer; selling, giving, furnishing underage person with alcohol.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I have a Liquor License currently & I have been dealing with his kind of business for
The pass-20 years.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“It is currently serving the community and I am planning on servicing the community
too.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Bob's Market
Liquor License Map - Bob's Market

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.


Page 29
Liquor License Data: BOB'S MARKET
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 4 4

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 0

Liquor Store 9 2 1

Beer and Wine Store 10 4 3

Restaurant 12 3 1

Club 14 1 0


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 40.98 29.90 31.10

Violent Crimes 7.43 3.26 4.67

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 62 52

Total Violations 105 86




Page 30
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1034001 1544 82 % 0% 6%

1035021 1498 61 % 5% 10 %

1035023 1511 71 % 2% 17 %

1035025 1744 70 % 0% 4%

1048021 941 84 % 0% 4%

1048022 1874 40 % 0% 8%

1049003 2131 84 % 6% 2%

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 31
Liquor License Map: BOB'S MARKET
12312 N 32ND ST




Ü
Date: 12/30/2020
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 32



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 06070409.

Summary

Applicant
Andrea Lewkowitz, Agent

License Type
Series 6 - Bar

Location
11111 N. 7th St.
Zoning Classification: RH PCD
Council District: 3

This request is for an ownership transfer of a liquor license for a bar. This location was
previously licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 15, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, consideration should be given only to the applicant's
personal qualifications.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

Page 33




I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Applicant is committed to upholding the highest standards for business and
maintaining compliance with applicable laws. Managers and staff will be trained in the
techniques of legal and responsible alcohol sales and service.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“Applicant will manage the Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs, which has been a well-known
and popular business and personal travel destination for many years. Applicant would
like to continue to offer alcoholic beverages to guests 21 and over.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting the applicant must resolve any
pending City of Phoenix building and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with
the City of Phoenix Code and Ordinances.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs
Liquor License Map - Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 34
Liquor License Data: POINTE HILTON TAPATIO CLIFFS
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 2 1

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 0

Liquor Store 9 1 0

Beer and Wine Store 10 3 2

Restaurant 12 6 5


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 42.36 21.04 35.88

Violent Crimes 7.67 1.56 2.54

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 59 1

Total Violations 98 2


Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1036053 797 92 % 20 % 1%

1036142 1037 91 % 4% 2%

1036151 906 52 % 16 % 12 %

1037012 1871 58 % 17 % 5%

1037023 1050 23 % 4% 11 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 35
Liquor License Map: POINTE HILTON TAPATIO CLIFFS
11111 N 7TH ST




Ü
Date: 1/15/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 36



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - NAJ & Eddies Tobacco

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 135279.

Summary

Applicant
Najman Najman, Agent

License Type
Series 10 - Beer and Wine Store

Location
3338 N. 19th Ave.
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 4

This request is for a new liquor license for a tobacco store. This location was
previously licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 13, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.


Page 37


Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I am a responsible citizen of the United State of America. I have managed multiple
retail locations & have the experience required to sell alcoholic products responsibly.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“We will provide tax revenue for the City of Phoenix by selling our products
responsibly.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - NAJ & Eddies Tobacco
Liquor License Map - NAJ & Eddies Tobacco

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 38
Liquor License Data: NAJ & EDDIES TOBACCO
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Wholesaler 4 1 0

Government 5 2 0

Beer and Wine Bar 7 3 0

Liquor Store 9 2 0

Beer and Wine Store 10 9 3

Restaurant 12 8 2


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 41.88 12.89 12.10

Violent Crimes 7.59 3.58 4.98

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 62 126

Total Violations 104 183




Page 39
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1104003 1439 74 % 7% 37 %

1104004 1344 49 % 16 % 20 %

1119001 678 96 % 8% 4%

1168002 1902 64 % 9% 20 %

1170001 2247 42 % 14 % 25 %

1170002 1845 32 % 9% 34 %

1170003 2632 43 % 11 % 45 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 40
Liquor License Map: NAJ & EDDIES TOBACCO
3338 N 19TH AVE




Ü
Date: 1/14/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 41



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Far Away Wine and Provisions

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 135262.

Summary

Applicant
Patricia Jasmin, Agent

License Type
Series 7 - Beer and Wine Bar

Location
3031 E. Indian School Road, Ste. 10
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 6

This request is for a new liquor license for a beer and wine bar. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 12, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.


Page 42


Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Both my business partner and myself have been in the business for many years. I
have had a successful business with a liquor license in Phoenix before. I have been
the food and beverage manager for a major resort as well as managed a wine
distributer both here in Arizona. My business partner has worked for several liquor
distributors in Arizona.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“The arcadia area has become known for having some of the best wine cafes,
lounges, and restaurants. This neighborhood enjoys having many options to choose
from. I believe Far Away Wines and Provisions will be a welcomed addition to the
neighborhood.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting the applicant must resolve any
pending City of Phoenix building and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with
the City of Phoenix Code and Ordinances.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Far Away Wine and Provisions
Liquor License Map - Far Away Wine and Provisions

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 43
Liquor License Data: FAR AWAY WINE PROVISIONS
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 8 2

Beer and Wine Bar 7 4 0

Liquor Store 9 4 0

Beer and Wine Store 10 7 4

Restaurant 12 26 12


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 41.88 6.07 14.01

Violent Crimes 7.59 1.24 4.24

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 62 50

Total Violations 104 90




Page 44
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1083021 1229 70 % 16 % 3%

1084001 718 2% 38 % 46 %

1084002 673 72 % 16 % 3%

1084005 422 16 % 37 % 13 %

1108011 1736 56 % 27 % 40 %

1108012 1115 19 % 30 % 33 %

1108013 1077 47 % 26 % 14 %

1108021 948 75 % 27 % 13 %

1109011 665 96 % 10 % 13 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 45
Liquor License Map: FAR AWAY WINE PROVISIONS
3031 E INDIAN SCHOOL RD




Ü
Date: 1/14/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 46



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Pizza to the Rescue

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 130369.

Summary

Applicant
Andrea Lewkowitz, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
2601 E. Indian School Road
Zoning Classification: C-2, C-3
Council District: 6

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit. This location
requires a Use Permit to allow outdoor alcoholic beverage consumption.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 6, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the


Page 47

State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations
on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within
the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the
last 12 months for the address listed.

Wrigley Mansion Club (Series 12)
2501 E. Telawa Trail, Phoenix
Calls for police service: 1
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Applicant is committed to upholding the highest standards for business and
maintaining compliance with applicable laws. Managers and staff will be trained in the
techniques of legal and responsible alcohol sales and service.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“Pizza to the Rescue will be a family-friendly neighborhood restaurant offering
Neopolitan style pizza, handmade pastas, fresh salads, and locally sourced craft
beverages. Applicant would like to offer alcoholic beverages to guests 21 and over as
an incident to the meals they enjoy.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting the applicant must resolve any
pending City of Phoenix building and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with
the City of Phoenix Code and Ordinances.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Pizza to the Rescue
Liquor License Map - Pizza to the Rescue

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.
Page 48
Liquor License Data: PIZZA TO THE RESCUE
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Microbrewery 3 1 0

Bar 6 7 4

Beer and Wine Bar 7 3 1

Liquor Store 9 3 1

Beer and Wine Store 10 7 3

Restaurant 12 22 7


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 41.88 8.12 12.84

Violent Crimes 7.59 1.45 3.71

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 61 52

Total Violations 104 87




Page 49
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1084001 718 2% 38 % 46 %

1084002 673 72 % 16 % 3%

1084003 1071 34 % 8% 40 %

1084005 422 16 % 37 % 13 %

1085021 743 50 % 29 % 20 %

1085023 1475 42 % 20 % 7%

1107021 1972 58 % 0% 30 %

1108011 1736 56 % 27 % 40 %

1108012 1115 19 % 30 % 33 %

1108013 1077 47 % 26 % 14 %

1108022 1168 33 % 16 % 7%

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 50
Liquor License Map: PIZZA TO THE RESCUE
2601 E INDIAN SCHOOL RD




Ü
Date: 1/11/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 51



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - 3 Sheilas Wine & Spirits

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 134980.

Summary

Applicant
Nancy Mangone, Agent

License Type
Series 4 - Wholesaler

Location
2440 W. Lincoln St., #165-3S
Zoning Classification: A-2
Council District: 7

This request is for a new liquor license for a wholesaler. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 7, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, consideration may be given only to the applicant's personal
qualifications and not to the location.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

Page 52




I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I have been a member in good standing of the Arizona Bar since 2004. In that time, I
have demonstrated my commitment to not only complying with federal, state and
municipal laws but also maintaining a high standard of personal integrity and ethical
conduct. For 3 Sheilas, I retained an expert in the liquor distribution industry who spent
the last 6 years as an award-winning sales representative for Southern Glazer's Wine
& Spirits. Together, we are more than capable, reliable and qualified to hold this Series
4 Wholesaler liquor license.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“Our goal is to provide our services to small wine-makers and craft distilleries that do
not otherwise have a distributor in Arizona. This focus will open the Arizona market to
new products and give Arizona consumers more choices for their wine and spirits
needs.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 53



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Scout Distribution AZ LLC

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 132123.

Summary

Applicant
Ryan Anderson, Agent

License Type
Series 4 - Wholesaler

Location
625 S. 27th Ave., Ste. 137
Zoning Classification: A-2
Council District: 7

This request is for a new liquor license for a wholesaler. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 13, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, consideration may be given only to the applicant's personal
qualifications and not the location.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

Page 54




I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“The applicant is a series 4 wholesaler. Its staff will be trained in Techniques of Alcohol
Training by an Arizona approved trainer and will follow Arizona's Title 4 liquor laws.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 55



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Mariscos y Raspados Tepehuaje

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 135223.

Summary

Applicant
Theresa Morse, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
4602 S. Central Ave.
Zoning Classification: C-3 SPVTABDO
Council District: 7

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 12, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.


Page 56


Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I have been working in the food industry since 2014. I will be attending Arizona Basic
and Management Liquor Law training to ensure that I and my staff abide by the laws. I
will also have my employees attend Liquor Law training to enforce the serious nature
of selling alcohol to intoxicated customers, how to identify them, what steps to take
and not selling alcohol to underage. Although, the business will sell alcohol my primary
purpose is to sell food.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“This business has been in existence since 2016. Community families come here to
enjoy the atmosphere, food and ice cream. The primary food served is seafood which
many customers have asked to have a beer to complement their meal. This location is
family oriented and is not a bar. Service/sale of alcohol is merely to complement the
food service. I will be attending both Basic and Management Liquor Law to obtain
various ways to determine intoxication and valid forms of identification along with other
state & city laws.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - Mariscos y Raspados Tepehuaje
Liquor License Map - Mariscos y Raspados Tepehuaje

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 57
Liquor License Data: MARISCOS Y RASPADOS
TEPEHUAJE
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Government 5 1 0

Bar 6 2 1

Beer and Wine Bar 7 2 0

Liquor Store 9 6 3

Beer and Wine Store 10 13 5

Restaurant 12 3 1


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 42.36 105.44 166.98

Violent Crimes 7.67 23.40 36.51

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 59 255

Total Violations 98 449




Page 58
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1148001 1594 64 % 11 % 36 %

1154001 1174 61 % 17 % 54 %

1154002 1147 57 % 0% 37 %

1157001 2689 65 % 7% 23 %

1158011 2230 38 % 18 % 36 %

1158012 1837 18 % 26 % 65 %

1158021 1871 53 % 7% 47 %

1158022 1536 47 % 17 % 24 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 59
Liquor License Map: MARISCOS Y RASPADOS TEPEHUAJE
4602 S CENTRAL AVE




Ü
Date: 1/14/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 60



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - R & F Liquors

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 09070729.

Summary

Applicant
Basim Hanna, Agent

License Type
Series 9 - Liquor Store

Location
4727 E. Southern Ave.
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 8

This request is for an ownership transfer of a liquor license for a liquor store. This
location was previously licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with an
interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is March 9, 2021.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the


Page 61

State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations
on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within
the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the
last 12 months for the address listed.

Maryland Deli & Liquor (Series 9)
6502 N. 7th St., Phoenix
Calls for police service: 22
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I am a very experienced in operating a liquor store. I currently own another liquor
store in Phoenix that I purchased 25 years ago. The liquor store is very successful and
I have never received a violation of any kind. I have also recently completed current
liquor law training.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“This location has been a liquor store for many years. The previous owner purchased
the store in 1984. Our neighbors like being able to run in and make a quick purchase.
This store is part of the community and would like to continue operating for them.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - R & F Liquors
Liquor License Map - R & F Liquors

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.



Page 62
Liquor License Data: R & F LIQUORS
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Beer and Wine Bar 7 2 0

Liquor Store 9 4 3

Beer and Wine Store 10 4 1

Restaurant 12 2 0


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 42.36 30.91 37.36

Violent Crimes 7.67 6.76 8.17

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 60 157

Total Violations 100 215




Page 63
Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1162021 1187 94 % 0% 39 %

1162022 1836 62 % 0% 20 %

1162023 1215 57 % 6% 37 %

1162041 1426 79 % 6% 24 %

1162042 1819 57 % 0% 32 %

1162043 535 59 % 24 % 8%

1162052 1024 85 % 4% 26 %

3197031 1479 51 % 11 % 13 %

3197032 602 81 % 30 % 11 %

3197033 2085 30 % 14 % 34 %

3197041 1777 42 % 9% 20 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 64
Liquor License Map: R & F LIQUORS
4727 E SOUTHERN AVE




Ü
Date: 2/2/2021
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 65



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
(CONTINUED FROM FEB. 17, 2021) Liquor License - El Pueblo Restaurant

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 128136.

Summary

Applicant
Amanda Arriaza, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
2270 N. 75th Ave., Ste. 101
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 7

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application was Feb. 1, 2021. However, the
applicant submitted a written request for more time.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Page 66




Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I Amanda consider myself a very responsible, honest person with good moral
standings, and I believe that I have the ability to handle a liquor license.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“They will have more options for alcoholic beverage with their meals.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends disapproval of this application based on a Police Department
recommendation for disapproval. The Police Department disapproval is based on
possible hidden ownership concerns, falsifying information on both City and State
questionnaires, and concerns associated with financing of the business. The applicant
has not demonstrated the capability, qualifications and reliability to hold and control a
liquor license.

Attachments
Liquor License Data - El Pueblo Restaurant
Liquor License Map - El Pueblo Restaurant
Liquor License Police Department Recommendation - El Pueblo Restaurant

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department.




Page 67
Liquor License Data: EL PUEBLO RESTAURANT
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 1 0

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 1

Liquor Store 9 3 2

Beer and Wine Store 10 4 1

Restaurant 12 17 11


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 42.36 181.15 278.76

Violent Crimes 7.67 26.56 25.47

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data
Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 60 87

Total Violations 100 143


Census 2010 Data 1/2 Mile Radius
BlockGroup 2010 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1125033 1448 67 % 6% 8%

1125034 1913 70 % 12 % 32 %

1125091 1905 0% 15 % 22 %

1125092 1564 47 % 23 % 9%

1125093 2841 0% 14 % 49 %

Average 61 % 13 % 19 %




Page 68
Liquor License Map: EL PUEBLO RESTAURANT
2270 N 75TH AVE




Ü
Date: 12/7/2020
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
mi


City Clerk Department
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72




PAYMENT ORDINANCE (Ordinance S-47331) (Items 16-19)
Ordinance S-47331 is a request to authorize the City Controller to
disburse funds, up to amounts indicated below, for the purpose of
paying vendors, contractors, claimants and others, and providing
additional payment authority under certain existing city contracts. This
section also requests continuing payment authority, up to amounts
indicated below, for the following contracts, contract extensions and/or
bids awarded. As indicated below, some items below require payment
pursuant to Phoenix City Code section 42-13.

16 Foster & Freeman USA, Inc.
For $84,000.00 in payment authority to purchase Recover Latent
Fingerprint Technology system for the Police Department. The Phoenix
Police Department's Crime Gun Intelligence Unit and Laboratory Services
Bureau are collaborating to use Recover Technology to process
discharged bullet casings to provide forensic information. The Recover
Technology can reveal fingerprints even after being physically removed
from an object due to washing, exposure to heat, or explosion. The
utilization of the equipment will support the Police department's strategic
initiative to prevent crime in the City of Phoenix by increasing the success
rate of fingerprint recovery. The purchase will be funded by the Phoenix
Police Department Project Safe Neighborhoods grant.

17 Settlement of Claim(s) Tan v. City of Phoenix
To make payment of up to $175,000.00 in settlement of claim(s) in Tan v.
Department pursuant to Phoenix City Code chapter 42. This is a
settlement of a bodily injury claim arising from a motor vehicle accident on
July 19, 2018 involving the Police Department.




Page 73

18 Trujillo Consulting, LLC

For $50,000.00 in payment authority for a new contract, starting on or
about March 8, 2021 to no later than June 30, 2021, to provide executive
consulting services for the Human Resources Department. A short-term
agreement is needed while a nationwide recruitment is completed to fill
the Housing Director position. Executive services will include managing
and directing the Housing Department's activities, including Public
Housing Operations and Maintenance, Affordable Housing Property
Management, Resident Supportive Services, Section 8 Housing Choice
Voucher Administration, and Housing Development.

19 Salt River Valley Water Users' Association
For $130,000.00 in payment authority to purchase irrigation water during
the 2021 calendar year for the Parks and Recreation Department. The
irrigation water is needed to water plants, trees, shrubs and grass at
various Parks and Recreation locations throughout the City of Phoenix.
The expenditure is essential for the grass and plant life at all City park
locations.




Page 74



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Dedication of a Public Utility and Sidewalk Easement Over a Portion of City-
owned Land Along Olney and 59th Avenues (Ordinance S-47334)

Request for the City Council to dedicate a public utility and sidewalk easement to
public use over a portion of City-owned land along Olney and 59th avenues; further
ordering the ordinance recorded.

Summary
The dedication is required for construction of the Estrella Crossing development (KIVA
19-722). Public improvements will be constructed by the developer along the north
side of the Olney Avenue alignment and the eastern property boundary adjacent to
Estrella Crossing.

The public utility and sidewalk easement is more fully described in Exhibit A, to be
recorded with ordinance.

Location
Northwest corner of Olney and 59th avenues, identified by Maricopa County Assessor
Parcel number 300-02-060.
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson, and the Parks and
Recreation and Finance departments.




Page 75



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Acquisition of Real Property for Intersection Improvements at 3rd and Glendale
Avenues (Ordinance S-47338)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to acquire real property and
related property interests by donation, purchase within the City's appraised value, or
by the power of eminent domain for intersection improvements at 3rd and Glendale
avenues. Further request authorization to dedicate land with roadway and/or public
improvements to public use via separate recording instrument. Further request to
authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item.

Summary
Acquisition is required for the construction and installation of a HAWK signal at the
intersection of 3rd and Glendale avenues. Improvements include a new pedestrian
signal, pavement, curb, gutter and construction of an Americans with Disabilities Act
accessible sidewalk.

The parcels affected by this project and included in this request are identified by
Maricopa County Assessor's parcel numbers 161-28-033A (located at 145 W. Glendale
Ave.) and 160-33-004G (located at 316 W. Glendale Ave.).

Financial Impact
Funding is available in the Street Transportation Department's Capital Improvement
Program budget.

Location
3rd and Glendale avenues
Council District: 6

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Street
Transportation and Finance departments.




Page 76



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Grant of Public Utility Easement on City-owned Property to Replace
Underground Cable at Nevitt Park (Ordinance S-47348)

Request City Council to grant a public utility easement, for consideration of $1.00
and/or other valuable consideration, for electrical facilities and the installation of new
conduit-encased cable on City-owned property within the Salt River Project (SRP)
service area, and further ordering the ordinance recorded. The public utility easement
is required for the replacement of new underground cable at Nevitt Park.

Summary
This public utility easement will be for the area more fully described in the legal
description ("Easement Premises") and will be granted to all public service
corporations, agricultural improvement districts and telecommunication corporations
providing utility service (collectively "Grantee") to the property located at 6815 S. 44th
Way, in perpetuity so long as Grantee uses the Easement Premises for the purposes
herein specified for an indefinite period, subject to the following terms and conditions:

A. Grantee is hereby granted the right to construct, reconstruct, replace, repair,
operate and maintain utility facilities together with appurtenant fixtures for use in
connection therewith (collectively "Grantee Facilities") to, through, across and
beyond Grantor's property within the Easement Premises. Subject to the notice
requirements provided in paragraph "I," Grantee shall at all times have the right of
full and free ingress and egress to and along the Easement Premises for the
purposes herein specified. Grantee acknowledges and accepts that Grantee shall
share the Easement Premises with other Grantees and shall use such Easement
Premises with other Grantees in accordance with and consistent with industry
standards and customs for shared use. Grantor agrees to coordinate the location of
Grantee's Facilities within the Easement Premises and to pay costs for relocation of
Grantee's Facilities as provided in paragraph "F."
B. Grantor shall not locate, erect or construct, or permit to be located or erected or
constructed, any building or structure within the limits of the Easement Premises.
However, Grantor reserves all other rights, interests, and uses of the Easement
Premises that are not inconsistent with Grantee's easement rights herein conveyed
and which do not interfere with or endanger any of the Grantee Facilities.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Grantor shall not have the right to lower by more


Page 77

than one foot or raise by more than two feet the surface grade of Easement
Premises without the prior written consent by the Grantee whose facilities will be
affected by the change of elevation.
C. Grantee shall not have the right to use the Easement Premises to store gasoline or
petroleum products, hazardous or toxic substances, or flammable materials;
provided however, that this prohibition shall not apply to any material, equipment or
substance contained in, or a part of, the Grantee Facilities, provided that Grantee
must comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations in
connection therewith. Additionally, the Easement Premises may not be used for the
storage of construction-related materials or to park or store construction-related
vehicles or equipment except on a temporary basis to construct, reconstruct,
replace, repair, operate or maintain the Grantee Facilities.
D. Grantor shall maintain an appropriate three-foot clear area around all edges of all
equipment pads for Grantee Facilities in addition to a clear operational area that
extends 12 feet immediately in front of all transformer or switching cabinet
openings, within the Easement Premises. No obstruction, trees, shrubs, fixtures or
permanent structures shall be placed or permitted by Grantor within said areas.
Grantee is hereby granted the right to trim, prune, cut, and clear away trees, brush,
shrubs or other obstruction within said areas.
E. Grantee shall exercise reasonable care to avoid damage to the Easement Premises
and all improvements thereon and agrees that following any work or use by Grantee
within the Easement Premises, the affected area, including without limitation, all
pavement, landscaping, concrete and other improvements permitted within the
Easement Premises pursuant to this easement will be restored by Grantee to as
close to original condition as is reasonably possible, at the expense of Grantee.
F. Grantor reserves the right to require the relocation of Grantee Facilities to a new
location within Grantor's property; provided however, that: (1) Grantor pays the
entire cost of redesigning and relocating existing Grantee Facilities to the new
location; and (2) Grantor provides Grantee with a new and substantially similar
public utility easement at no cost to Grantee. After relocation of Grantee Facilities to
the new easement area, Grantee shall abandon its rights to use the Easement
Premises granted in this easement without cost or consequence to Grantor.
G. Each public service corporation and telecommunication services corporation as a
Grantee shall coordinate and work with other Grantees in the use of the Easement
Premises. In the event that a third party or other Grantee requests the relocation of
existing Grantee Facilities to a new location (whether or not) within the Easement
Premises, the requesting party shall pay the entire cost of redesigning and
relocating the existing Grantee Facilities.
H. Grantee shall not have the right to transfer, convey or assign its interests in this
easement to any individual, corporation or other entity without the prior written
consent of Grantor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Grantee


Page 78

shall notify Grantor of any proposed transfer, conveyance or assignment of any
rights granted herein at address listed below.
I. Except in emergencies or exigent circumstances such as service restoration,
Grantee agrees to contact Grantor at least one business day prior to Grantee's
entrance onto the Easement Premises where the Easement Premises are located:
(1) on a site that includes Aviation Department facilities; (2) water and wastewater
treatment facilities; (3) Police Department headquarters located at 620 W.
Washington St.; (4) Fire Department headquarters located at 150 S. 12th St.; (5)
City Hall located at 200 W. Washington St.; (6) City Court Building located at 300 W.
Washington St.; (7) Calvin C. Goode Building located at 251 W. Washington St.; (8)
Transit Operations Center located at 320 N. 1st Ave. or West Transit Facility located
at 405 N. 79th Ave.; or (9) in a secured or fenced area.

Location
6815 S. 44th Way, identified by Maricopa County Assessor's parcel number 123-18-
516.
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson, and the Parks and
Recreation and Finance departments.




Page 79



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Revise Legal Description for Public Utility Easement at Cesar Chavez Park
(Ordinance S-47344)

Request the City Council to amend Ordinance S-46897 to revise the legal description
for a public utility easement; and further ordering the ordinance recorded.

Summary
Ordinance S-46897 granted a public utility easement (PUE) within the Salt River
Project service area for installation of a pad-mounted transformer required for the
construction of Cesar Chavez Community Center. After the PUE was granted by
ordinance, Parks and Recreation Department (Parks) staff discovered that the PUE
conflicted with a large, old tree. At the request of Parks, the design was modified to
preserve the tree.

The revised legal description is to be recorded with this ordinance. All other conditions
and stipulations previously stated in the above referenced ordinance will remain the
same.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
Ordinance S-46897 was adopted by City Council on Sept. 2, 2020, by a vote of 9-0.

Location
7858 S. 35th Ave., identified by Maricopa County Assessor Parcel Number 300-13-
001Q.
Council District: 7

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson, and the Parks and
Recreation and Finance departments.




Page 80



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Auditing and Consulting Services - MCC 180241 (Ordinance S-47336)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow additional
expenditures under Contract 150616 with Eide Bailly LLP; Contract 150617 with Berry,
Dunn, McNeil & Parker, LLC; Contract 150635 with MGT of America Consulting, LLC;
Contract 150640 with Heinfeld, Meech, & Co.; Contract 150641 with REDW, LLC;
Contract 150642 with Myers and Stauffer LC; and Contract 150660 with
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP for the purchase of auditing and consulting services for the
Regional Wireless Cooperative (RWC) under the Office of Government Relations and
the Information Technology Services Department. Further request authorization for the
City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The additional expenditures
will not exceed $404,000.

Summary
This contract provides external expertise for auditing and consulting services. The
RWC, per its governance, must be financially audited annually by an external auditor.
It is budgeted for each year and its findings are shared with the Board of Directors. In
addition, the Information Technology Services Department (ITS), in support of
maintaining citywide Payment Card Industry (PCI) compliance, will utilize an external
auditor to obtain a PCI certified Qualified Security Assessor to perform services
required for PCI Data Security Standards (DSS). Compliance with PCI DSS is
mandated by the payment card industry in order for the City to process payment card
transactions. Services will include, but are not limited to, a report on compliance, a gap
analysis, an analysis of the existing PCI structure, and assistance to the City in
providing guidance and recommendations on improving current processes. Additional
funds are needed to add RWC and ITS as authorized users. The City Auditor
Department currently utilizes these contract services.

Contract Term
The contract term is June 1, 2019 through May 31, 2024.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $404,000 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $984,000. Funds are available in the RWC (under the Office of
Government Relations) and ITS Department budget.


Page 81


Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This contract was originally approved by City Council on June 5, 2019.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Regional Wireless
Cooperative under the Office of Government Relations and Deputy City Manager Toni
Maccarone and the Information Technology Services Department.




Page 82



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Parts, Installation, and Service for Direct Current Battery Plant - IFB 19-020A -
Requirements Contract (Ordinance S-47339)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow additional
expenditures under Contract 149250 with Power Products Services, Inc. for the
purchase of heavy-duty batteries, preventative maintenance, and repairs to direct
current (DC) battery back-up systems for the Information Technology Services
Department in support of public safety radio sites. The additional amount of
$1,250,000 is needed to purchase additional battery replacements. Further request
authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The
additional expenditures will not exceed $1,250,000.

Summary
This contract currently provides heavy-duty batteries, preventative maintenance, and
repairs to direct current (DC) battery backup systems for the Regional Wireless
Cooperative (RWC) and the Information Technology Services Department. These
batteries power all the RWC communication sites and are instrumental in keeping the
Fire and Police departments' public safety radio systems operational in the event of a
power outage.

Additional funding is needed to address the replacement cycle of the batteries based
on actual experience of battery capacity degradation and failure, with many of the
batteries being installed prior to 2019. The original replacement cycle was based on
the manufacturer’s estimate of a 10-year lifespan. The manufacturer has since
reduced that to seven years, which aligns to what radio systems staff are experiencing
in the field. The lifecycle replacement plan has been modified with the more accurate
lifespan information. The result is that more batteries than expected will require
simultaneous replacement during this contract period.

The cost of the battery replacement is charged to the RWC, and the RWC has already
budgeted for this increase.

Contract Term
The contract term is Jan. 23, 2019 through Jan. 22, 2024.



Page 83

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $1,250,000 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $2,500,000. Funds are available in the Information Technology
Services Department's budget and are reimbursed by the RWC.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The contract was originally approved by City Council on Jan. 23, 2019.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the Information
Technology Services Department.




Page 84



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Indoor/Outdoor Sport Court Resurfacing and Repair Services - Requirements
Contract - IFB 21-027 (Ordinance S-47347)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into contracts with
Arizona Gym Floors, LLC and Elite Sports Builders, LLC, to provide indoor/outdoor
sport court resurfacing and repair services for the Parks and Recreation Department.
Further request authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this
item. The aggregate contract value will not exceed $1,350,000.

Summary
These contracts will provide resurfacing and repair services for indoor, multi-use wood
floors and outdoor, concrete sport courts. The Parks and Recreation Department uses
these services to resurface and repair indoor/outdoor sport court floors such as tennis,
volleyball, pickle ball and basketball courts located at various recreation facilities. The
services include, but are not limited to; floor screening, line striping, floor repair and
wood floor refinishing and maintenance.

Procurement Information
IFB 21-027 was conducted in accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10. There
were seven offers received by the Finance Department's Procurement Division on Nov.
20, 2021, which was evaluated on price and responsibility to provide the required
goods and services. The bid notification was sent to 301 suppliers and was publicly
posted and available for download from the City's website.

The Deputy Finance Director recommends that the offers from Arizona Gym Floors,
LLC and Elite Sports Builders, LLC be accepted as the lowest-priced, responsive and
responsible offers.

Contract Term
The five-year contract term will begin on or about March 1, 2021.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $1,350,000. Funds are available in the
Parks and Recreation Department's budget.



Page 85

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson and the Parks and
Recreation Department.




Page 86



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Federal Legislative Representation and Consulting Services - EXC 20-095A
(Ordinance S-47342)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow additional
expenditures under Contract 153512 with HROD, Inc doing business as Murray,
Montgomery & O'Donnell, for the purchase of federal representation and consulting
services for the Phoenix Office of Government Relations (OGR). Further request
authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The
additional expenditures will not exceed $160,000.

Summary
This consultant will assist OGR and other City departments with identifying grant
opportunities and to successfully pursue funding that supports City services. The
consultant will represent the City face-to-face with elected officials and agencies that
make decisions about federal funding that directly affects crucial City programs and
services in areas including, but not limited to, water and environment, community
development, transportation and public safety. Identifying grant funding is particularly
important when faced with unforeseen emergency situations, such as COVID-19,
which impacts the City's effort to maintain continuity of services for City residents and
businesses. Funds were initially approved for the first year of the contract and this
request will authorize expenditures for the remaining optional extension period allowed
under the agreement.

Contract Term
The contract term is April 15, 2020 through April 14, 2023.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $160,000 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $240,000. Funds are available in the Office of Government
Relations' budget.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This contract was originally approved by City Council on April 15, 2020.




Page 87

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, the Office of Government
Relations and the Finance Department.




Page 88



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Plumbing Services, Including Rooter and Drain Cleaning - Requirements
Contract - IFB 18-123A (Ordinance S-47345)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow additional
expenditures under Contract 146660 with Above All Plumbing Services, Inc. for the
purchase of plumbing services, including rooter services and drain cleaning, for
citywide use. Further request authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds
related to this item. The additional expenditures will not exceed $2,700,000.

Summary
The primary departments having used the contract during the first three years are Fire,
Public Works, Parks and Convention Center. The plumbing contract is utilized to
supply all standard labor, materials, supplies, equipment, permits, tools, vehicles,
transportation and security fees necessary for plumbing repairs and/or services for
various privately and publicly owned City of Phoenix properties or facilities. This
contract has recently also been used for Covid-19 related supplies to support efforts to
change plumbing fixtures, such as faucets, toilets, and drinking fountains, to touchless
versions.

Contract Term
The contract term is Jan. 30, 2018 through Jan. 31, 2023.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $2,700,000 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $5,700,000. Funds are available in various Department’s
budgets.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This contract was originally approved by City Council on Jan 10, 2018.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Finance Department.




Page 89



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Audio/Visual Services for City Meetings - IFB 16-022 (Ordinance S-47352)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to extend and allow additional
expenditures and continue using Ordinance S-42375 under Contract 142347 with
Skyline Productions, Inc. for the purchase of audio-visual services for the
Communications Office. Further request authorization for the City Controller to
disburse all funds related to this item. The additional expenditures will not exceed
$32,000.

Summary
This contract provides on-site audio and visual (A/V) services on an as-needed basis
for the Communications Office at citywide public meetings, and board and commission
hearings. City Council and/or Subcommittee meetings are held weekly and are
currently open to the public through Cisco WebEx, live streamed on phoenix.gov and
broadcast to PHXTV to allow accessibility and transparency of the City’s public
meetings. The public address audio is transmitted to WebEx and to PHXTV studios for
the television broadcast and for live or archived viewing online at phoenix.gov.
Additionally, visual presentations such as PowerPoints and digital files are used at
meetings to supplement discussion. Skyline Productions, Inc. tests the A/V
configurations prior to the meeting start, ensures the devices and components are
working properly, and makes necessary adjustments to the A/V systems throughout
the meetings. The extension would ensure no lapse in coverage as these services are
needed to maintain the overall accessibility and transparency of city meetings, held
virtually during the on-going COVID-19 pandemic.

Contract Term
Upon approval, the contract term will be extended through March 22, 2022.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $32,000.00 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $332,000. Any remaining funds authorized by previous Council
action will be applied to the extended contract term. Funds are available in the
Communications Office's budget.




Page 90

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This contract was originally approved by City Council on March 23, 2016.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Communications Office.




Page 91



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend Federal HOME Program Contract between City of Phoenix and Phoenix
Broadway Associates Limited Partnership (Ordinance S-47355)

Request authorization for the City Manager, or his designee, to amend the federal
HOME Investment Partnerships Acquisition and Rehabilitation Loan Agreement,
City Contract No. 97116, between the City of Phoenix and Phoenix Broadway
Associates Limited Partnership, an Arizona limited partnership to increase the
number of City HOME units to six units and increase the Period of Affordability by
five years in exchange for a forgiveness of the outstanding interest on the loan of
approximately $150,000. Authorization is also requested for the City Manager, or
his designee, to take all action and execute all necessary documents to implement
the amended terms. There is no impact to the General Fund.

Summary
City Contract No. 97116, in the original amount of $250,000 of federal HOME
Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds, was executed on June 13, 2001
to assist with the development of the 196-unit Sunrise Vista Apartments located at
4415 S. 28th St. As part of this contract the City also entered an intercreditor
agreement in partnership with the Arizona Department of Housing and the Phoenix
IDA who also provided funding for the project. The Loan Agreement currently
secures four City HOME units serving households whose income does not exceed
50 percent of the Area Median Income.

The Phoenix Broadway Associates Limited Partnership, an Arizona limited
partnership (Owner) is in the process of refinancing this property and has offered to
pay off the entire principal balance of the loan as well as increase the public benefit
by extending the Period of Affordability by five years along with providing the City
an additional two HOME units (for a total of six) in exchange for a forgiveness of the
outstanding interest of approximately $150,000. As the original funding came from
federal sources, there is no impact on the General Fund. All recaptured debt will be
repurposed for further affordable housing per the requirements of the original
funding source.




Page 92

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the General Fund.

Location
4415 S. 28th St.
Council District: 8

This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson and the Housing
Department.




Page 93



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Request to Approve Amendment to IGA with Arizona State University for Civic
Space Use (Ordinance S-47349)

Request authorization for the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an
amendment to Agreement 119092-IGA, between the Parks and Recreation
Department and Arizona State University, regarding the Phase II Civic Space
improvements.

Summary
In 2006, the City and Arizona State University (ASU) entered into Master Lease and
Operating Agreement 119092 (the "Master Lease"), in which ASU leased property from
the City for the ASU Downtown Campus. The City and ASU also entered into
Agreement 119092-IGA (the "IGA"), in 2009, regarding the use, operation and
maintenance of Civic Space Park and the A.E. England building.

Subsequently, in 2010, the Phase I Civic Space improvements were completed. The
IGA was amended in 2012, for use of a vacant retail space in the AE England building.
The same year, in 2012, ASU completed renovations to the Post Office building and
the City completed the Phase II Civic Space improvements (the "Phase II
improvements") on what is referred to as the F2 parcel. With the completion of the
Phase II improvements, Civic Space Park's boundaries were extended up to the
southern edge of the renovated Post Office.

With the ASU renovations to the Post Office completed and the City's completion of the
Phase II improvements on the F2 parcel, the parties amended the Master Lease in
2012, to exclude the F2 parcel and the park improvements from the premises leased
by the City to ASU. Additionally, it was understood that the IGA would also need to be
amended to reflect the City's and ASU's rights and obligations with respect to the F2
Parcel and the Phase II improvements; however, the amendment did not occur at that
time.

City staff and ASU staff recently re-engaged in discussions about updating the IGA to
reflect the Phase II improvements and specifically to update the boundary of Civic
Space Park relative to the Post Office. In addition to the boundary issue, the
amendment also clarifies ASU’s ability to continue to work with the Parks and


Page 94

Recreation Department regarding enforcement of park rules and regulations relating to
the use of the Phase II improvements.

Contract Term
This amendment will not change the term of Agreement 119092-IGA.

Financial Impact
No financial impact as a result of the amendment. The City already maintains the
Phase II improvements.

Location
Civic Space Park, 424 N. Central Ave.
Council District: 7

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson and the Parks and
Recreation Department.




Page 95
SECOND AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA)
AND
OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE OPERATING AGREEMENT


Downtown Phoenix Civic Space / A.E. England Building
City Contract No. #119092- IGA-002


This Second Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) and Operating and
Maintenance Operating Agreement, Downtown Phoenix Civic Space / A.E. England Building,
City Contract No. # 119092-IGA-002 (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of
_______________, 2020 (the "Effective Date"), between the ARIZONA BOARD OF
REGENTS, a body corporate, acting for and on behalf of Arizona State University (“ASU”), and
the CITY OF PHOENIX, a municipal corporation of the State of Arizona (“City”).

RECITALS

A. The City and ASU have partnered on an ASU Campus in Downtown Phoenix (the
ASU Downtown Phoenix Campus), each assuming certain obligations and responsibilities in the
development and operation of that campus as described in the Master Lease and Operating
Agreement (City Contract #119092) dated June 22, 2006 (the "Lease"), as amended by a First
Amendment to the Lease dated March 14, 2014 (City Contract No. 119092-001) (the "First
Amendment to Lease"), a Second Amendment to the Lease dated October 1, 2019 (City
Contract #119092-002), and a Third Amendment to the Lease dated October 1, 2019 (City
Contract #119092-003) (collectively referred to herein as the "Master Lease").

B. The City and ASU previously entered into an Intergovernmental Operating
Agreement # 119092-IGA, dated July 24, 2009 (the "Initial IGA"), as amended by that certain
First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement, dated September 11, 2012 (City Contract
#119092-IGA-001) to address the use, operation, and maintenance of the Civic Space and A.E.
England Building (the "First Amendment"; the Initial IGA and the First Amendment are
referred to herein as the "IGA").

C. The construction of the Phase II Civic Space improvements (the "Phase II Civic
Space Improvements") on the Downtown Post Office property on the real property legally
described on Page 1 of Exhibit "A" and graphically depicted on Page 2 of Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "F2 Parcel") occurred on or about
February 28, 2012. Pursuant to the First Amendment to Lease, the parties (i) amended the
Master Lease to exclude the F2 Parcel and Phase II Civic Space Improvements from the
Premises leased by the City to ASU pursuant to the Master Lease, and (ii) agreed to amend the
IGA to reflect the parties' respective rights and obligations with respect to the F2 Parcel and the
Phase II Civic Space Improvements.

D. The City and ASU desire to amend the IGA as more fully described below.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual
obligations of the parties hereto, the City and ASU agree as set forth below:


IGA 2ND AMEND #231582 (11.15.20) 1
Page 96
AGREEMENT

1. Property Subject to IGA. The parties agree that, unless the context expressly
indicates otherwise, all references in the IGA and herein to "Civic Space", "Civic Space Park"
and the "Park" shall be deemed to include the F2 Parcel and the Phase II Civic Space
Improvements constructed thereon.

2. ASU Use Rights Regarding the Phase II Civic Space Improvements. The
following Section G is added to the end of Section 4 of the Initial IGA:

G. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein,
the parties agree that (a) ASU's officers, officials, agents,
staff, employees, volunteers, and students shall have the
right to use the Phase II Civic Space Improvements at all
times that the Civic Space Park is open for use by the
general public, (b) in addition to using the Phase II Civic
Space Improvements for the Private Events permitted by
Section 4(C) of the Initial IGA, ASU may use the Phase II
Civic Space Improvements for other programs and events,
subject to the prior approval of the City, and (c) so long as
ASU does not interfere with any Special Events or Private
Events hosted by the City at the F2 Parcel, ASU shall have
the right to work with the City’s Parks and Recreation
Department, which is responsible for enforcement of Park
rules and regulations, and the Parks and Recreation
Department shall work cooperatively with ASU as any
concerns arise relating to the use of the Phase II Civic
Space Improvements.

3. General. The Recitals set forth on the first page hereof are incorporated herein as
though fully set forth herein. Unless specifically stated otherwise in this Amendment, all
capitalized terms herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the IGA. Except as amended
by this Amendment, the provisions of the IGA remain in full force and effect. In the event of
any conflict between the IGA and the provisions of this Amendment, this Amendment shall
control.

[SEE NEXT PAGE FOR SIGNATURES]




IGA 2ND AMEND #231582 (11.15.20) 2
Page 97
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ASU and the City have caused their respective duly
authorized representatives to execute this Second Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement
(IGA) and Operating and Maintenance Operating Agreement, Downtown Phoenix Civic Space /
A.E. England Building, City Contract No. # 119092-IGA-002, on their behalf as of the Effective
Date set forth on the first page hereof.

CITY OF PHOENIX, a municipal corporation of
the State of Arizona




By:
Name:
Title:



ATTEST:



City Clerk

The above Amendment has been reviewed pursuant to A.R.S. § 11-952, by the undersigned
attorney for City of Phoenix, Arizona, who has determined that it is in the proper form and is
within the powers and authority granted to the City of Phoenix, Arizona.



City Attorney

ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS
acting for and on behalf of Arizona State
University




By:
John P. Creer
Vice President for University Real Estate
Development, ASU




IGA 2ND AMEND #231582 (11.15.20) 3
Page 98
EXHIBIT “A”




IGA 2ND AMEND #231582 (11.15.20) Exhibit "A", Page 1
Page 99
EXHIBIT "A" GRAPHIC DEPICTION




IGA 2ND AMEND #231582 (11.15.20) Exhibit "A", Page 2
Page 100



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Request to Approve Amendment to IGA with Arizona State University West Park
Usage (Ordinance S-47353)

Request authorization for the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an
amendment to Agreement 113777-IGA, between the Parks and Recreation
Department and Arizona State University, regarding the use of ASU West land as a

Summary
In 2004, the Parks and Recreation Department (City) and Arizona State University
(ASU) entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement, Agreement 113777 (the "IGA"),
in which ASU provided approximately 40 acres of land on the southwest corner of the
ASU West Campus for the City to use as a public park (51st Avenue and Sweetwater
Soccer Fields); with ASU having rights of first use to certain portions of the park during
certain times of the day. The park included two lighted soccer fields, a restroom
building and open turf for general recreation (Attachment A). The IGA stated that the
park will be maintained by City staff with ASU paying all irrigation costs.

In 2011, ASU and the City executed amendment 113777-1 to remove the eastern,
undeveloped portion of the park for exclusive use by ASU (Attachment B). This
request allowed the university to have space for intramural activities in that area.

Recently, ASU notified the City that they no longer need any priority rights and/or uses
for the portion of the park currently maintained by the City. This area includes two
lighted soccer fields and a restroom building, which are for public use. As such, ASU
has requested that the City now pay for irrigation costs specifically associated with the
park area maintained by the City.

Contract Term
This amendment will not change the term of Agreement 113777-IGA.

Financial Impact
Irrigation costs are estimated to be $56,000 per fiscal year.




Page 101

Location
4950 W. Wood Drive
Council District: 1

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Inger Erickson and the Parks and
Recreation Department.




Page 102
ATTACHMENT A

ASU Property to be Used as a City Park per Agreement 113777-IGA




Page 103
ATTACHMENT B





Page 104



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Authorization to Enter into Agreement with Maricopa Association of
Governments for 9-1-1 System Planning (Ordinance S-47358)

Request authorization for the City Manager, or designee, to retroactively enter into a
contract with the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) for emergency 9-1-1
system management and planning in an amount not to exceed $135,000. Further
request authorization for the City Treasurer to accept, and for the City Controller to
disburse, all funds related to this item.

Summary
The System Administrator Agency for the Regional 9-1-1 Program Maricopa Region is
the City of Phoenix (Fire Department). The City of Phoenix is the contracting agent of
ongoing operations of the 9-1-1 call routing system. This authority is given through
signed resolutions by Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) member agencies.
These agreements act as the governing documents for the oversight of the 9-1-1
system design, implementation, and management in the MAG Region.

MAG is the recipient of 9-1-1 Special Assessments and intends to contract with the
information transport into the 9-1-1 emergency system and support the economic
goals of the State, provide an easily accessible emergency service to the community,
and emergency 9-1-1 planning services.

Contract Term
The contract term is July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021.

Financial Impact
The Fire Department will be reimbursed for emergency 9-1-1 planning efforts in an
amount not to exceed $135,000.

Location
The Phoenix Fire Department Regional 9-1-1 Services section provides 9-1-1 service,
and related technical support, across the Valley.




Page 105

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Jeff Barton and the Fire Department.




Page 106



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Federal Fiscal Year 2020 Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program Funds
(Ordinance S-47362)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to retroactively apply for, and
accept, if awarded, up to $175,596 from federal fiscal year (FFY) 2020 Assistance to
Firefighters Grant (AFG) Program to fund two projects: Personal Protective Equipment
(PPE) Decontamination and Fire Ground Survival Training for the Fire Department.
Further request authorization for the City Treasurer to accept, and for the City
Controller to disburse, all funds related to this item. If not approved, the grant, if
awarded, would be turned down.

Summary
The AFG Program, administered through the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), is intended to help the nation's fire service by providing vital funds to local fire
departments across the country. The primary goal of the program is to meet the
firefighting and emergency response needs of fire departments, nonaffiliated
emergency medical service organizations, and State Fire Training Academies. Since
2001, AFG has helped firefighters and other first responders obtain critically needed
equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training, and other resources
necessary to protect the public and emergency personnel from fire and related hazards.

PPE Decontamination
The PPE Decontamination Project will update the Fire Department’s PPE
decontamination and cleaning process with an overall goal of improving firefighter
health and safety by reducing repeated exposure to harmful contaminants on unclean
or inadequately cleaned PPE and fire ground equipment. The funds will be utilized to
purchase new washers and dryers and a downdraft table for use in the PFD laundry
room. The total cost for this project is $80,596 with a City-match of around 15 percent
for upgrading the department’s aging PPE decontamination and cleaning system.




Page 107

Fire Ground Survival Training
The Fire Ground Survival (FGS) Training Project will certify Phoenix and regional
partner department trainers to teach Fire Ground Survival to our personnel. The
training will enhance first responder awareness of conditions on the fire ground and
give firefighters the critical skills necessary to handle a firefighter emergency. The
funds will be utilized to provide training to 30 instructors and purchase two training
props; one will be housed permanently at the training academy and one will be trailer
mounted for mobile department wide training. The total cost for this project is $95,000,
with a City-match of around 15 percent.

Since 2008, the Fire Department has received more than $5 million in AFG funding.
These grants were used to purchase portable radios, thermal imaging cameras,
Incident Safety Officer System training, Automatic Chest Compression devices, Peer
Support Team Training and Physical Therapy Equipment upgrades.

Procurement Information
The Fire Department will administer the grant in accordance with Administrative
Regulation 3.10.

Contract Term
The two-year grant Period of Performance is projected to begin on or around May 1,
2021.

Financial Impact
The grant is anticipated to have a 15 percent required cost-match; funds are available
in the Fire Department's operating budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Jeff Barton and the Fire Department.




Page 108



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
(CONTINUED FROM FEB. 17, 2021) Wastewater Collection System Emergency
Repair and Replacement - Job Order Contracting Services - 4108JOC196
(Ordinance S-47299)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into separate master
agreements with two contractors to provide Wastewater Collection System Emergency
Repair and Replacement Job Order Contracting (JOC) services for the Water Services
Department. Further request to authorize execution of amendments to the agreement
as necessary within the Council-approved expenditure authority as provided below,
and for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The total fee for
services will not exceed $20 million.

Additionally, request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to take all action
deemed necessary to execute all utilities-related design and construction agreements,
licenses, permits, and requests for utility services relating to the development, design,
and construction of the project and to include disbursement of funds. Utility services
include, but are not limited to: electrical; water; sewer; natural gas;
telecommunications; cable television; railroads; and other modes of transportation.
This authorization excludes any transaction involving an interest in real property.

Summary
The JOC contractors' services will be used on an as-needed basis to provide
Wastewater Collection System Emergency Repair and Replacement services for repair
or replacement of sanitary sewer lines and force mains. Additionally, the JOC
contractors will be responsible for fulfilling Small Business Enterprise program
requirements.

These Agreements are essential to the health, safety, and welfare of the public and
critical operations for the City.

Procurement Information
The selections were made using a qualifications-based selection process set forth in
section 34-604 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.). In accordance with A.R.S.
section 34-604(H), the City may not publicly release information on proposals received
or the scoring results until an agreement is awarded. Eight firms submitted proposals
and are listed below.

Page 109




Selected Firms
Rank 1: WaCo, LLC dba WaCo Contracting
Rank 2: Achen-Gardner Construction, LLC

Additional Proposers
Rank 3: TF Contracting Services, LLC
Rank 4: FPS Civil, LLC
Rank 5: Action Direct LLC dba Redpoint Contracting
Rank 6: Blucor Contracting, Inc.
Rank 7: Kinkaid Civil Construction, LLC
Rank 8: Degan Construction, LLC

Contract Term
The term of each master agreement is for up to five years, or up to $10 million,
whichever occurs first. Work scope identified and incorporated into the master
agreement prior to the end of the term may be agreed to by the parties, and work may
extend past the termination of the master agreement. No additional changes may be
executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The master agreement values for each of the JOC contractors will not exceed $10
million, including all subcontractor and reimbursable costs. The total fee for services
will not exceed $20 million. The value for each job order agreement performed under
this master agreement will be up to $2 million. In no event will any job order agreement
exceed this limit without Council approval to increase the limit.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department's Capital Improvement
Program. The Budget and Research Department will review and approve funding
availability prior to issuance of any job order agreement. Payments may be made up to
agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend past the
agreement termination.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Managers Karen Peters and Mario Paniagua,
the Water Services Department, and the City Engineer.




Page 110



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Substitute Ground Lease with American Greyhound Racing (Ordinance S-47363)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a substitute
ground lease with American Greyhound Racing, Inc. (Greyhound) at Phoenix Sky
Harbor International Airport.

Summary
Greyhound leases the greyhound racetrack located at 3801 E. Washington St.
Greyhound currently uses the location for a community swap meet market. Greyhound
has requested a five-year lease extension for their current lease. The current lease
has undergone numerous amendments resulting in changes to the boundaries of the
original leased premises. This substitute lease will replace the current lease and clarify
the description of the lease premises.

Contract Term
The term of the lease will be five years and will contain one option to extend the term
on a month-to-month basis for up to two years. The option may be exercised at the
sole discretion of the Aviation Director.

Financial Impact
Rent for the first year of the lease will be approximately $954,240 ($0.78 per-square-
foot), plus applicable taxes. Rent will be adjusted annually thereafter according to the
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale Consumer Price Index. Total anticipated revenue over the
five-year term will be approximately $4,771,200.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
· The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board recommended this item for approval on Nov.
19, 2020, by a vote of 9-0.
· The Transportation, Infrastructure and Innovation Subcommittee recommended this
item for approval on Dec. 2, 2020, by a vote of 4-0.

Location
3801 E. Washington St.
Council District: 8



Page 111

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Aviation
Department.




Page 112



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Authorization to Apply for Federal Grant Funds for Aviation-Related Projects
(Ordinance S-47359)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to submit applications for
grants to the United States and any of its agencies on behalf of the City of Phoenix
Airport System for aviation-related projects. Further request to authorize the City
Manager, or his designee, to sign all certifications required for the grants, to enter into
agreements with the United States and any of its agencies for the purpose of
accepting federal money, and to amend existing grant agreements. The grant
agreements may contain other terms and conditions deemed necessary or appropriate
by the City Manager or his designee. Additionally request to authorize the City
Treasurer to accept, and the City Controller to disburse, all funds related to this item.

Summary
Each year, the Aviation Department submits grant applications to the United States
and its agencies for eligible aviation-related projects. The Aviation Department takes a
proactive position in obtaining City Council authorization to accept any grants awarded
by the United States and its agencies for eligible aviation-related projects.

These authorizations will allow the Aviation Department to respond promptly to federal
agencies if and when grant offers become available on short notice. The grant
agreements or grant amendments or both may become available from the Department
of Transportation, including the FAA Airport Improvement Program, Department of
Homeland Security, or any other federal program. Action associated with these
authorizations will be for projects in the Aviation Department’s approved Capital
Improvement Plan.

Contract Term
These authorizations are effective until June 30, 2022.

Location
Citywide

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Aviation
Department.

Page 113



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Authorization to Apply for Federal Non-Grant Funds for Aviation-Related
Projects (Ordinance S-47360)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to submit applications for non-
grant funds to the United States and any of its agencies on behalf of the City of
Phoenix Airport System for aviation-related projects. Further request to authorize the
City Manager, or his designee, to sign all certifications required for the non-grant
agreements, enter into agreements with the United States and any of its agencies for
the purpose of accepting federal non-grant funds, and to amend existing agreements.
The agreements and amendments may contain other terms and conditions deemed
necessary or appropriate by the City Manager or his designee. Additionally request to
authorize the City Treasurer to accept, and the City Controller to disburse, all funds
related to this item.

Summary
These authorizations will allow the Aviation Department to respond promptly to federal
agencies if and when non-grant funds become available on short notice. The
transaction agreements or amendments may become available from the Department
of Homeland Security or any other federal program. The Aviation Department takes a
proactive position in obtaining City Council authorization to accept any non-grant funds
awarded by the United States for eligible aviation-related projects.

Contract Term
These authorizations are effective until June 30, 2022.

Location
Citywide

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Aviation
Department.




Page 114



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Authorization to Apply for State Grant Funds for Aviation-Related Projects
(Ordinance S-47361)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to submit applications for
grants to the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) on behalf of the City of
Phoenix Airport System for aviation-related projects. Further request to authorize the
City Manager, or his designee, to enter into grant agreements with ADOT, amend
existing grant agreements with ADOT, and take any administrative action related to the
grant agreements that the City Manager or his designee deems necessary or
appropriate. The grant agreements and amendments may contain other terms and
conditions deemed necessary or appropriate by the City Manager or his designee.
Additionally request to authorize the City Treasurer to accept, and the City Controller to
disburse, all funds related to this item.

Summary
Each year, the Aviation Department submits grant applications to ADOT for eligible
projects, including those related to maintenance, safety, capacity enhancement,
environmental studies or planning, and land acquisition. The Aviation Department
takes a proactive position in obtaining City Council authorization to accept any grants
awarded by ADOT for eligible aviation-related projects.

Under the grant agreements, the State requires the City to indemnify and hold
harmless the State and any of its departments, agencies, officers, and employees from
any and all liability, loss, or damage the State may suffer as a result of claims,
demands, costs, or judgments of any character arising out of the City's or its
independent contractor's performance or non-performance in carrying out any
provision of the grant agreements. If any legal action is brought, the indemnification
also includes court costs, expenses of litigation, and reasonable attorney's fees.
Further, the State will not assume any liability to third persons and will not reimburse
the City for the City’s liability to third persons resulting from the performance of the
grant agreements or any subcontract thereunder.

Contract Term
These authorizations are effective until June 30, 2022.



Page 115

Location
Citywide

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Aviation
Department.




Page 116



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Purchase of Nex-Terra Bins (Ordinance S-47335)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Waxie Sanitary Supply for the purchase of 15 Nex-Terra bins to be used by customers
to drop off materials at Phoenix City Hall and Calvin C. Goode buildings. Further
request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. This
contract will have a one-time expenditure of $17,464.

Summary
The Public Works Department seeks to purchase 15 Nex-Terra bins for multiple City
departments, to be used for customers to drop off materials during the newly
established Appointment Only model at Phoenix City Hall and Calvin C. Goode
buildings. The bins will be placed in the atriums and will allow materials to be dropped
off by customers and vendors in a safe and secure manner. The bins can support
larger materials such as blueprints and remain secure until accessed by the respective
department. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City established the
Appointment Only model and these bins will allow customers to drop off time-sensitive
materials to the respective department and continue to use City services without delay.

Procurement Information
In accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10, normal competition was waived as
the result of a determination memo citing time restriction. As a result of the current
COVID-19 pandemic, time is of the essence to purchase these bins to allow business
and services with the City to continue without delay.

Contract Term
This contract will begin upon City Council approval on March 3, 2021 for the one-time
purchase of 15 Nex-Terra bins.

Financial Impact
This contract will have a one-time expenditure amount of $17,464, including all
applicable taxes. Funding is available in the General Fund.

Location
Phoenix City Hall - 200 W. Washington St.


Page 117

Calvin C. Goode - 251 W. Washington St.
Council District: 7

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Karen Peters and the Public Works
Department.




Page 118



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Sheet Metal Fabrication and Welding Services (Ordinance S-47343)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into separate
agreements with Ellyson Enterprises, LLC and Lincoln Constructors, Inc. to provide
sheet metal fabrication and welding services to be used on an as-needed basis.
Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this
item. The total aggregate amount is $1.4 million over the life of the contracts.

Summary
The Public Works Department is responsible for sheet metal fabrication and welding
services at various City locations and surrounding areas. These agreements will allow
welding and fabrication services to be performed onsite, allowing essential functions to
continue with little downtime. These agreements will provide welding services such as
metal fence repair, repairs to City-owned communication towers, equipment repairs
and custom fabrication. The Aviation Department is responsible for sheet metal
fabrication at Phoenix Sky Harbor International, Deer Valley, and Goodyear Airports for
items such as stainless-steel wraps for the airport security check-point bin
containments or podiums, HVAC plenum duct work, and package air conditioning unit
elbows and roof curbs.

Procurement Information
Invitation for Bid 21-FMD-024 was conducted in accordance with Administrative
Regulation 3.10. Two offers were received by the Public Works Department
Procurement Services on Dec. 2, 2020. The offers were evaluated based on price,
responsiveness to all specifications, terms and conditions, and responsibility to provide
the required services. The offers submitted by Ellyson Enterprises, LLC and Lincoln
Constructors, Inc. were deemed fair and reasonable.

Group A - Welding Services
Ellyson Enterprises, LLC : $205 bid total
Lincoln Constructors, Inc.: $285 bid total

Group B - Sheet Metal Fabrication
Lincoln Constructors, Inc.: $1,140 bid total



Page 119

Contract Term
The initial contract term is for one year beginning on or about April 1, 2021 with four
one-year options to extend the term, for a total contract term of up to five years if all
options are exercised.

Financial Impact
The aggregate value of the contracts, including all option years, is $1.4 million,
including all applicable taxes, with an estimated annual expenditure of $280,000.
Funding is available in the Aviation and Public Works departments' budgets.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Managers Mario Paniagua and Karen Peters
and the Aviation and Public Works departments.




Page 120



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Inform.Net Veeder Root Fuel Monitoring Software Upgrade (Ordinance S-47346)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with Eaton Sales and Service to provide an upgrade to existing Veeder Root fuel
monitoring software. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all
funds related to this item. This item will have an aggregate amount of $26,652.

Summary
The Public Works Department is responsible for maintenance, repair, and monitoring
of 28 fuel sites. Recently, the City of Phoenix upgraded its operating system to
Windows 10. At the time of the upgrade, it was discovered that the current Inform.Net
software on existing Veeder Root equipment that monitors the underground fuel
storage tanks for leaks at these fuel sites was no longer supported by the local vendor.
It is imperative to get the new software installed to stay in compliance with federal and
state regulations.

This item has been reviewed and approved by the Information Technology Services
Department.

Procurement Information
In accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10, a competitive process was waived
in lieu of a determination memo citing special circumstance - without competition with
a time restriction. The equipment used to monitor these underground storage tanks is
currently running on a legacy Windows 7 system, and not supported by Eaton Sales
and Service, Public Works Department's current fuel maintenance and repair vendor.

Contract Term
This agreement will begin on or about Council approval on March 3, 2021, and will
have two option years to be exercised in increments of up to one year, for a total
contract term of three years.

Financial Impact
This item will have an aggregate amount of $26,652. Funding is available in the Public
Works Department's budget.



Page 121

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Karen Peters and the Public Works
Department.




Page 122



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Rubberized Crack Sealant - Requirements Contract IFB 21-037 (Ordinance S-
47332)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Crafco, Inc. to purchase rubberized crack sealant for the Street Transportation
Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds
related to this item. The aggregate contract value will not exceed $650,000.

Summary
Rubberized crack sealant is used by the Street Transportation Department as a cost-
effective way to prolong the life of asphalt pavement. The rubberized sealant serves as
a water-tight filler between cracks in asphalt pavement. This product is necessary for
Street Transportation Maintenance staff to perform proper maintenance and repair to
the City's roadways.

Procurement Information
IFB 21-037 was conducted in accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10. There
were three offers received by the Procurement Division on Dec. 18, 2020, which were
evaluated on price, responsiveness to specifications, and responsibility to provide the
required goods. The bid notification was sent to 39 suppliers and was publicly posted
and available for download from the City's website.

The Deputy Finance Director recommends the offer from Crafco, Inc. be accepted as
the lowest priced, responsive and responsible offer.

Contract Term
The five-year contract term will begin on or about March 4, 2021.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $650,000. Funds are available in the
Street Transportation Department's budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Street
Transportation Department.


Page 123



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Telecommunications Services and Interstate Telecommunications Services
License with XO Communication Services, LLC (Ordinance S-47333)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a nonexclusive,
revocable license with XO Communication Services, LLC to construct, install, operate,
maintain and use the public highways in the City of Phoenix in order to provide
telecommunications services and interstate telecommunications services in, under,
over, and across public rights-of-way in the City, subject to the terms and conditions
contained in the license and Phoenix City Code. Further request the Licensee sign the
license within 60 days of Council action, or this authorization will expire. There is no
financial impact to the City for this license.

Summary
XO Communications Services, LLC has a Telecommunications Services and Interstate
Telecommunications Services License with the City. XO Communications Services,
LLC has requested to enter into a new license. The new license will be for a period of
five years with an option for a one-time renewal, and will contain appropriate insurance
and indemnification provisions, require a performance bond and a security fund,
provide for terms of transfer and revocation, and provide for compensation for the
commercial use of public rights-of-way while permitting the City to manage the rights-
of-way.

Contract Term
The license is for a five-year Telecommunications Services and Interstate
Telecommunications Services License with an option for a one-time renewal and will
begin within 60 days of Council approval.

Financial Impact
Licensee will pay an annual fee to the City based on a calculated formula using linear
footage and the Consumer Price Index.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved License 141499 on Aug. 31, 2015 (Ordinance S-41800).




Page 124

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Street
Transportation Department.




Page 125



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Traffic Control Officer Services - Requirements Contract IFB 21-020 (Ordinance
S-47354)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with Blue Enforcement Services LLC to purchase Traffic Control Officer Services for
the Street Transportation Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller
to disburse all funds related to this item. The aggregate agreement value will not
exceed $1.5 million.

Summary
The purpose of this agreement is to provide the Street Transportation Department with
off-duty law enforcement officers to manually direct traffic during traffic signal outages
throughout the City of Phoenix. The services will be required on a routine basis, such
as scheduled repairs to traffic signal infrastructure, and non-routine and emergency
situations, such as after normal working hours, weekends, holidays, or early morning
call-outs due to traffic collisions involving damage to traffic signals. These services will
assist in keeping staff safe while performing repairs, as staff are in close proximity to
moving traffic and perform services in overnight hours where the lack of daylight can
be dangerous. This agreement will also help alleviate manpower shortages related to
Phoenix Police off-duty officer availability in maintaining the City of Phoenix traffic
signal system.

Procurement Information
IFB 21-020 was conducted in accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10. There
were four offers received by the Finance Department Procurement Division on Jan. 22,
2021, which were evaluated on price, responsiveness to specifications, and
responsibility to provide the required goods and services. The bid notification was sent
to 90 suppliers and was publicly posted and available for download from the City's
website.

The Deputy Finance Director recommends the offer from Blue Enforcement Services
LLC be accepted as the lowest-priced, responsive and responsible offer.

Contract Term
The five-year agreement term will begin on or about April 1, 2021.


Page 126


Financial Impact
The total agreement value will not exceed $1.5 million. Funding is available in the
Street Transportation Department’s budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Street
Transportation and Finance departments.




Page 127



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Grand Canal Phase III - Engineering Services - ST87600131 (Ordinance S-47337)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with J2 Engineering & Environmental Design, LLC, to provide Engineering Services
that include design and possible construction administration and inspection (CA&I)
services for the Grand Canal Phase III project. Further request to authorize execution
of amendments to the agreement as necessary within the Council-approved
expenditure authority as provided below, and for the City Controller to disburse all
funds related to this item. The fee for services will not exceed $600,000.

Additionally, request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to take all action
deemed necessary to execute all utilities-related design and construction agreements,
licenses, permits, and requests for utility services relating to the development, design,
and construction of the project and to include disbursement of funds. Utility services
include, but are not limited to: electrical, water, sewer, natural gas,
telecommunications, cable television, railroads, and other modes of transportation.
This authorization excludes any transaction involving an interest in real property.

Summary
The purpose of this project is to install a pathway for pedestrians and bicycle use and
incorporate public art, landscaping and neighborhood access points along the Grand
Canal between 75th and 47th avenues.

J2 Engineering & Environmental Design, LLC’s services include, but are not limited to:
engineer’s cost estimates and special provisions; design of a concrete or asphalt
pedestrian and bicycle path; lighting; furniture; shade structures; public art;
complementary landscaping; possible pedestrian bridges; street crossing elements
such as full traffic signals and HAWK pedestrian beacons; pedestrian refuge islands
and/or marked but unsignalized crosswalks that will be constructed within the City of
Phoenix right-of-way; assessment and design of landscaping and drainage; and
coordination with other City departments, governmental agencies and operations staff
during design of the project.

This Agreement is essential to the health, safety, and welfare of the public and critical
operations for the City.


Page 128


Procurement Information
The selection was made using a qualifications-based selection process set forth in
section 34-603 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.). In accordance with A.R.S.
section 34-603(H), the City may not publicly release information on proposals received
or the scoring results until an agreement is awarded. Six firms submitted proposals
and are listed below:

Selected Firm
Rank 1: J2 Engineering & Environmental Design, LLC

Additional Proposers
Rank 2: Premier Engineering Corporation
Rank 3: Ritoch-Powell & Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Rank 4: Alta Planning + Design, Inc.
Rank 5: SmithGroup, Inc.
Rank 6: Waibel & Associates Landscape Architecture, LLC

Contract Term
The term of the agreement is two years from the issuance of the Notice to Proceed.
Work scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end of the term
may be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination of the
agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for J2 Engineering and Environmental Design, LLC will not
exceed $600,000, including all subconsultant and reimbursable costs.

Funding is available in the Street Transportation Department's Capital Improvement
Program budget. The Budget and Research Department will separately review and
approve funding availability prior to execution of any amendments. Payments may be
made up to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend
past the agreement termination.

Location
Grand Canal between 75th and 47th avenues
Council Districts: 4 and 5

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua, the Street
Transportation Department, and the City Engineer.


Page 129



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Salt River Project Construction License for City Project on Oak Street: 3rd Street
to Grand Canal Bike and Pedestrian Improvements (Ordinance S-47350)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a Construction
License with Salt River Project for Bike and Pedestrian Improvements on Oak
Street from 3rd Street to the Grand Canal. Further request the City Council to grant
an exception pursuant to Phoenix City Code 42-20 to authorize inclusion in the
documents pertaining to this transaction of indemnification and assumption of
liability provisions that otherwise should be prohibited by Phoenix City Code 42-18.

Summary
The purpose of this license is to allow the City to install two traffic signal conduit
crossings, two traffic signal poles, eight streetlights, and one pull box as well as
pavement, curb, and gutter and curb ramp upgrades the entire length of the project
that will run parallel with Salt River Project Irrigation facilities. This work is in
conjunction with City Project ST87600121 Oak Street: 3rd Street to Grand Canal
Bike and Pedestrian Improvements.

Contract Term
The term of the Construction License is one year, effective when the City begins
construction, expected to be March 2021.

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City of Phoenix for this license.

Location
Oak Street: 3rd Street to Grand Canal
Council Districts: 4 and 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Street
Transportation Department.




Page 130



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Salt River Project Construction License for Water Main Replacement on Indian
School Road to Campbell Avenue, 32nd to 36th Streets (Ordinance S-47351)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a Construction
License with Salt River Project for waterline improvements from Indian School Road
to Campbell Avenue, between 32nd and 36th Streets. Further request the City
Council to grant an exception pursuant to Phoenix City Code 42-20 to authorize
inclusion in the documents pertaining to this transaction of indemnification and
assumption of liability provisions that otherwise should be prohibited by Phoenix
City Code 42-18.

Summary
The purpose of this license is to allow the City to install four waterline services that
will cross and one fire hydrant service line that will run parallel with SRP Irrigation
facilities. This work is in conjunction with City Project WS85509044 Water Main
Replacement Indian School Road to Campbell Avenue, 32nd to 36th streets.

Contract Term
The term of the Construction License is one year, effective when the City begins
construction, expected to be March 2021.

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City of Phoenix for this license.

Location
Indian School Road to Campbell Avenue, 32nd to 36th streets
Council District: 6

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Street
Transportation Department.




Page 131



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Backflow Prevention Assemblies, Supply and Service - IFB 16-044A (Ordinance S
-47356)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to ratify the extension and
allow additional expenditures under Contract 142113 with Piper Power Plumbing &
Mechanical Inc., for the supply and service of Backflow Prevention Assemblies for
Public Works, Water Services, and Phoenix Convention Center Departments. Further
request authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item.
The additional expenditures will not exceed $819,975.

Summary
Backflow Prevention assemblies are required on all potable water supply piping, which
must be tested and maintained to ensure proper operation. This contract will provide
these services in all City-owned facilities. Without these services, the City of Phoenix
would be unable to operate its public buildings, parks, and swimming pools.

The City is working to competitively re-solicit the contract to ensure the City receives
the services at the best possible value. An extension is necessary in order to ensure
City services are not interrupted during the re-solicitation process.

Contract Term
The contract term will be extended through May 31, 2022.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $819,975 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $3,569,975. Funds are available in the various Department’s
budgets.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This contract was originally approved by City Council on Feb. 3, 2016.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Finance Department.




Page 132



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Backflow Annual Testing and Inspection - IFB 16-124A (Ordinance S-47357)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to extend and allow additional
expenditures under Contract 143007 with Metering Services Inc., for the supply and
service of Backflow Annual Testing and Inspection for Public Works, Water Services,
and Phoenix Convention Center Departments. Further request authorization for the
City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The additional expenditures
will not exceed $84,500.

The City is working to competitively re-solicit the contract to ensure the City receives
the services at the best possible value. An extension is necessary in order to ensure
City services are not interrupted during the re-solicitation process.

Summary
Backflow prevention devices are required for all domestic water supply piping, and
must be tested annually and maintained to ensure proper operation and code
compliance. This contract will provide backflow testing and inspection services for City-
owned facilities. Without these services, the City of Phoenix would be unable to
operate its public buildings, parks, and swimming pools.

Contract Term
The contract term will be extended through May 31, 2022.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $84,500 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $1,597,000. Funds are available in the various Department's
budgets.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This contract was originally approved by City Council on June 1, 2016.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and Finance Department.




Page 133



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Supply of Water and Wastewater Treatment Materials (Ordinance S-47340)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into separate
agreements with Chemrite, Inc., Donau Carbon US LLC, DPC Enterprises LP, DuBois
Chemicals, Inc., Hill Brothers Chemical Company, and Thatcher Company of Arizona,
Inc. to provide water and wastewater treatment materials for the purpose of treating
drinking water and effluent for the Water Services Department (WSD). Further request
to authorize execution of amendments to the agreements as necessary within the
Council approved expenditure authority as provided below, and for the City Controller
to disburse all funds related to this item. The aggregate agreements value will not
exceed $25.5 million.

Summary
The purpose of these agreements is to provide WSD with water and wastewater
treatment materials. The Water Production, Wastewater Collection, and Wastewater
Treatment divisions of WSD produce drinking water, collect sewage, and treat
wastewater respectively through a series of treatment processes in accordance with
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements.

The Contractors' services include but are not limited to: supply, delivery, and unloading
of water and wastewater treatment materials at various WSD facilities.

Procurement Information
The selections were made using an Invitation for Bid (IFB) procurement process in
accordance with City of Phoenix Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Selected Contractors
Chemrite, Inc.
Donau Carbon US LLC
DPC Enterprises LP
DuBois Chemicals, Inc.
Hill Brothers Chemical Company
Thatcher Company of Arizona, Inc.




Page 134

Contract Term
The term for each agreement is five years effective April 1, 2021.

Financial Impact
The agreement values for Chemrite, Inc., Donau Carbon US LLC, DPC Enterprises LP,
DuBois Chemicals, Inc., Hill Brothers Chemicals Company, and Thatcher Company of
Arizona, Inc.; will not exceed a total aggregate value of $25.5 million.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department's Operating budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Karen Peters and the Water Services
Department.




Page 135



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Maintenance Services for Water Services Department Zeta Potential Analyzers -
Amendment 2 (Ordinance S-47341)

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an amendment to
Agreement 146378 with Malvern Panalytical, Inc., to provide additional maintenance
services and replace Zeta Potential Analyzer equipment for the Water Services
Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds
related to this item. The additional amount will not exceed $230,000.

Summary
This agreement provides the Water Services Department (WSD), Environmental
Services Division with maintenance services for Zeta Potential Analyzer equipment.
The equipment is used to measure the effectiveness of the water filtration process and
to gather data regarding water quality at each of the laboratories located within the
City’s four Water Treatment Plants. The equipment also enables WSD to perform a
multitude of analytical tests as required by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and
Arizona and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES & NPDES) to
maintain compliance with Federal, State and Local regulations.

This amendment is necessary because the current equipment is now obsolete and no
longer supported by the vendor. This amendment will allow WSD to continue to
maintain Zeta Potential Analyzers and replace the obsolete equipment, to continue the
department's commitment to providing the highest quality drinking water and services
to our customers.

Financial Impact
· The initial agreement for Zeta Potential Analyzer Maintenance services was
authorized for a fee not-to-exceed $100,000.
· This amendment will increase the agreement value by an additional $230,000, for a
new total not-to-exceed agreement value of $330,000.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department’s Operating budget.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved Zeta Potential Analyzer Maintenance Agreement 146378


Page 136

(Ordinance S-43616) on June 7, 2017.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Karen Peters and the Water Services
Department.




Page 137



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Final Plat - Villa Fifty 2 - PLAT 200605 - North of Taylor and East of 52nd Streets

Plat: 200605
Project: 19-3156
Name of Plat: Villa Fifty 2
Owner(s): Villa Fifty 2, Limited Partnership
Engineer(s): Richard T. Waage, RLS
Request: A 1 Lot Commercial Plat
Reviewed by Staff: Jan. 29, 2021
Final Plat requires Formal Action Only

Summary
Staff requests that the above plat be approved by the City Council and certified by the
City Clerk. Recording of the plat dedicates the streets and easements as shown to the
public. This plat needs to record concurrently with Abandonment 200521.

Location
Generally located north of Taylor and East of 52nd Streets.
Council District: 6

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 138



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Final Plat - Faith Christian Center - PLAT 200590 - North of McDowell Road and
West of 26th Place

Plat: 200590
Project: 18-1117
Name of Plat: Faith Christian Center
Owner(s): Faith Christian Center
Engineer(s): David S. Klein, RLS
Request: A 3 Lot Commercial Plat
Reviewed by Staff: Jan. 27, 2021
Final Plat requires Formal Action Only

Summary
Staff requests that the above plat be approved by the City Council and certified by the
City Clerk. Recording of the plat dedicates the streets and easements as shown to the
public.

Location
Generally located north of McDowell Road and west of 26th Place
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 139



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Abandonment of Right-of-Way - ABND 200548 - 14251 N. 7th St. (Resolution
21898)

Abandonment: 200548
Project: 04-3558
Applicant: Evan Boxwell; 88 Ventures - 7th Street LLC
Request: Two abandon two sidewalk easements, per Ordinance S-32313; located on
14251 N. 7th St. Recorded with Maricopa County Recorder, recording number 2015-
1302598.
Date of Decision: Oct. 28, 2020

Summary
The resolution of this abandonment is to be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder.

Location
14251 N. 7th St.
Council District: 3

Financial Impact
None.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 140



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Abandonment of Right-of-Way - ABND 200514 - Southeast Corner of Bethany
Home Road and West of 107th Avenue (Resolution 21900)

Abandonment: 200514
Project: 14-834
Applicant: Joe Petrucci; EPS Group Inc.
Request: To abandon a portion of right-of-way, public utility easement and multi-use
trail easement.
Date of Hearing: May 7, 2020

Location
Southeast corner of Bethany Home Road and West of 107th Avenue
Council District: 5

Financial Impact
A fee was also collected as part of this abandonment in the amount of $625.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 141



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Abandonment of Right-of-Way - ABND 200521 - North of Taylor and East of 52nd
Streets (Resolution 21899)

Abandonment: 200521
Project: 19-3156
Applicant: Lorne Wallace; RAS Developments Inc.
Request: To abandon the 20-foot alley right of way
Date of Decision/Hearing: June 4, 2020

Summary
The resolution of the abandonment and the subdivision plat, Final Plat for "Villa Fifty
2," Plat 200605, are to be recorded together with the Maricopa County recorder on the
same day, at the same time. The sequence of recording to be followed is that the
resolution is recorded first, then the plat.

Location
North of Taylor and East of 52nd Streets
Council District: 6

Financial Impact
A fee was also collected as part of this abandonment in the amount of $26,250.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 142



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-52-20-4 -
Northwest Corner of 7th and Oak Streets (Ordinance G-6812)

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
R-3 (Multifamily Residence District) and C-2 (Intermediate Commercial District) to WU
Code T3:2 MT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 3:2 District, Transit Midtown Character
Area) and WU Code T5:6 MT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:6 District, Transit
Midtown Character Area) for multifamily residential.

Summary
Current Zoning: R-3 (Multifamily Residence District) (2.12 acres) and C-2
(Intermediate Commercial) (2.65 acres)
Proposed Zoning: WU Code T3:2 MT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 3:2 District,
Transit Midtown Character Area) (0.23-acres) and WU Code T5:6 MT (Walkable Urban
Code, Transect 5:6 District, Transit Midtown Character Area) (4.54 acres)
Acreage: 4.77 acres
Proposed Use: Multifamily residential

Owner: MBA 7th St, LLC, et al
Applicant: Jimmy McCloskey, Embrey Partners
Representative: Nick Wood, Esq., Snell & Wilmer, LLP

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Encanto Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan. 11,
2021 and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation with an additional
stipulation, by a vote of 11-1.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb 4, 2021 and
recommended approval, per the Encanto Village Planning Committee recommendation
with an additional stipulation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Northeast corner of Oak and 7th Streets
Council District: 4
Parcel Addresses: 2302, 2320, and 2330 N. 7th St.; and 375 E. Sheridan St.


Page 143


Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 144
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN
(Z-52-20-4) FROM R-3 (MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT)
AND C-2 (INTERMEDIATE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO WU
CODE T3:2 MT (WALKABLE URBAN CODE, TRANSECT 3:2
DISTRICT, MIDTOWN CHARACTER AREA) AND WU CODE T5:6
MT (WALKABLE URBAN CODE, TRANSECT 5:6 DISTRICT,
MIDTOWN CHARACTER AREA)

____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 4.77-acre site located at the northwest

corner of 7th Street and Oak Street, in a portion of Section 32, Township 2 North,

Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed from

2.12 acres of “R-3” (Multifamily Residence District) and 2.65 acres of “C-2”

(Intermediate Commercial District) to 0.23 acres of “WU Code T3:2 MT” (Walkable

Urban Code, Transect 3:2 District, Midtown Character Area) and 4.54 acres of “WU

Code T5:6 MT” (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:6 District, Midtown Character Area).




Page 145
SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,

violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance: (AWAITING PC RECOMMENDATION)

1. There shall be a minimum landscape setback of 15 feet measured from the
west property line. The landscape setback shall allow for a maximum
encroachment of nine feet to accommodate Walkable Urban Code Frontage
Type from Table 1305.1. The landscape setback area shall be planted with
shade trees placed 25 feet on center or in equivalent groupings with 75 percent
being a minimum 3-inch caliper. The conditions of this stipulation shall be
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

2. No solid perimeter wall greater than 36 inches in height shall be situated within
the boundary of the required landscape setback along the west property line, as
described in Stipulation No. 1.

3. All ground level units oriented to the west (Monterey Park) shall utilize a
Walkable Urban Code Frontage Type from Table 1305.1. and Frontage Types
shall be permitted to encroach into the required landscape area a maximum of
nine feet as necessary to accommodate the selected frontage type, as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.

4. The developer shall provide and maintain the following bicycle infrastructure as
described below and as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

a. A bicycle repair station (fix-it station) along the southern edge of the site,
visible, and accessible from the public sidewalk. The station shall include
but not limited to the following: standard repair tools affixed to the station;
a tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair stand that allows pedals and
wheels to spin freely while adjusting the bike.

b. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H.6.d.
of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

c. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at
a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 spaces near



Page 146
entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements of Section
1306.H. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

5. The developer shall provide pedestrian access to and from the site with an
emphasis on minimizing walking distances to the existing HAWK at 7th Street
and Oak Street, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The developer shall provide traffic calming to slow vehicle traffic exiting the
property with specific regard to pedestrian safety on the public sidewalk, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. The developer shall dedicate a 10-foot sidewalk easement along the west side
of 7th Street, as approved by Planning and Development.

8. There shall be a maximum of one driveway on 7th Street.

9. The developer shall submit a Traffic Impact Study to the City of Phoenix for this
development. No preliminary approval of plans shall be granted until the study
is reviewed and approved by the City. The study shall include, at a minimum, a
traffic signal warrant analysis for the intersection of 7th Street and Oak Street
to evaluate conversion of the HAWK. The developer shall be responsible for
mitigation costs, as identified in the traffic study approval letter.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

11. The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the proposed
development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460 obstruction
analysis review process, prior to construction permit approval, as per plans
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

12. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

13. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix for the site, per the content and form prescribed by the City Attorney
prior to final site plan approval.

14. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.


Page 147
15. The developer shall place informational signage in the “motor court” area to
inform exiting traffic how the reversable lane on 7th Street functions including
the hours when the center lane is southbound, northbound, and center-turn.

16. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March,

2021.




________________________________
MAYOR




ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager




Page 148
Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (3 Pages)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 149
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-52-20-4

Within a portion of Section 32, Township 2 North, Range 3 East of the Gila and Salt
River Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona, being more particularly described
as follows:

PARCEL NO. 1: (APN NO. 118-46-030)

The East half of Lot 5, BALTIMORE HEIGHTS, according to the plat of record in the
office of the County Recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, recorded in Book 2 of Maps,
page 67;

EXCEPT that part described as follows:

BEGINNING at a point 20 feet South of the No1iheast comer of said Lot 5;

THENCE South along the East line of said Lot 5, 75 feet;

THENCE West 250 feet;

THENCE North 75 feet;

THENCE East 250 feet to POINT OF BEGINNING; and

EXCEPT that part described as follows:

BEGINNING at a point 95 feet South of the Northeast comer of said Lot 5;

THENCE South along the East line of said Lot 5, 100 feet to a point;

THENCE West 166 feet to a point;

THENCE North 100 feet to a point;

THENCE East 166 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;

EXCEPT the North 20 feet thereof; and

EXCEPT the East 7 feet thereof.

PARCEL NO. 2: (APN NO. 118-46-043A)

The East half of Lot 7, BALTIMORE HEIGHTS, according to the plat of record in the
office of the County Recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, recorded in Book 2 of Maps,
page 67;



Page 150
EXCEPT the East 132 feet of the South 125 feet of the East half of said Lot 7; and

EXCEPT the East 7 feet conveyed to City of Phoenix, a municipal corporation, by
document recorded April 24, 1941, in Book 349 of Deeds, page 456, records of
Maricopa County, Arizona.

PARCEL NO. 3: (APN NO. 118-46-033A)

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF
MARICOPA, STATE OF ARIZONA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

THAT PART OF LOT 5 BALTIMORE HEIGHTS, ACCORDING TO BOOK 2 OF MAPS,
PAGE 67, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 5, 95 FEET SOUTH OF
THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID LOT;

THENCE WEST 166 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 100 FEET;

THENCE EAST 166 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 100 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;

EXCEPT THEREFROM THE EAST 7 FEET THEREOF.

PARCEL NO. 4: (APN NO. 118-46-043B)

The East 132 feet of the South 125 feet of the East half of Lot 7, Baltimore Heights,
according to the plat of record in the office of the County Recorder of Maricopa County,
Arizona in Book 2 of Maps, page 67;

EXCEPT therefrom the East 7 feet conveyed to the City of Phoenix, by instrument
recorded April 24, 1941 in Book 349 of Deeds page 456, records of Maricopa County,
Arizona;

ALSO EXCEPT therefrom that part of said Lot 7 described as follows:

BEGINNING at a point on the South line of Lot 7, distant 7 feet West of the Southeast
comer thereof;

Thence West 9 feet along the South line of said Lot 7 to a point;

Thence Northeasterly to a point which is 7 feet West and 9 feet North of the Southeast
comer of said Lot 7;


Page 151
Thence South 9 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, as condemned by the City of
Phoenix, in Order of Condemnation recorded in Docket 2621 page 154, records of
Maricopa County, Arizona;

AND ALSO EXCEPT all oil, gas and other minerals as reserved in instrument recorded
in Docket 10313 page 379, records of Maricopa County, Arizona.




Page 152
Page 153



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-64-19-4 -
Approximately 238 Feet West of the Southwest Corner of 3rd Street and Thomas
Road (Ordinance G-6813)

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
P-2 TOD-1 (Parking, Interim Transit Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development) for Planned Unit Development to allow a self-service
storage facility, household moving center, car sharing, and all uses permitted in
Walkable Urban Code Transect 5:7 District (commercial and residential).

Summary
Current Zoning: P-2 TOD-1 (Parking, Interim Transit Oriented Zoning Overlay District
One)
Proposed Zoning: PUD (Planned Unit Development)
Acreage: 0.94 acres
Proposed Use: Self-service storage facility, household moving center, car sharing, and
all uses permitted in Walkable Urban Code Transect 5:7 District (commercial and
residential).

Owner: Amerco Real Estate Company
Applicant: Parul Butala, Amerco Real Estate
Representative: Parul Butala, Amerco Real Estate

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Encanto Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan. 11,
2021 and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation with a modification,
by a vote of 7-6.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021 and
recommended approval, per the Encanto Village Planning Committee recommendation
with a modified and additional stipulation, by a vote of 7-0.

Location
Approximately 238 feet west of the southwest corner of 3rd Street and Thomas Road
Council District: 4


Page 154

Parcel Addresses: 67, 69, and 71 E. Thomas Road

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 155
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN
(Z-64-19-4) FROM P-2 TOD-1 (PARKING, INTERIM TRANSIT-
ORIENTED ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT ONE) TO PUD
(PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT).

____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 0.94-acre property located approximately

238 feet west of the southwest corner of 3rd Street and Thomas Road, in a portion of

Section 32, Township 2 North, Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit

“A”, is hereby changed from “P-2 TOD-1” (Parking, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning

Overlay District One) to “PUD” (Planned Unit Development).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,




Page 156
violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the U-Haul Smart Mobility Center
Flagship Store PUD reflecting the changes approved through this
request shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 30 days of
Narrative shall be consistent with Development Narrative date stamped
December 11, 2020 as modified by the following stipulations.

a. Front Cover: Add “City Council adopted: [Insert Adoption date]”
below “Hearing Draft: December 10, 2021.

b. Page 12: Revise the table entry for Parking Standards to: delete
Bullet No. 1 regarding bicycle parking and to modify Bullet No. 2 to
specify that the bicycle repair station shall be installed outside the
building, in a conspicuous location, and accessible from the public
sidewalk.

c. Page 12: Revise the table entry for Signage Standards to read as
follows: “The PUD will meet the requirements of this section aside
from one deviations and requirements found in Section E. Signs
on page 14.”

d. Page 12: Revise the table entry for Landscape Standards to read
as follows: “The PUD will meet the requirements of this section, as
applicable to the T5:7 transect, with the additional requirement
that the Thomas Road frontage be planted with a minimum of
seven (7) drought tolerant shade trees with 25 percent four-inch
caliper and the remainder being three-inch caliper or greater.

e. Page 13: Revise the table entry for Character Areas to read as
follows: “The PUD will meet the requirements of this section, as
applicable to the T5:7 Transect, for the Transit Midtown Character
Area, with three additions and clarifications…:

(1) Delete Bullet No. 1

(2) Modify Bullet No. 2 to read “Trees as required per the
Section 1309 and as modified by the Section 1309
reference in this table, in addition to shrubs to provide 75%
groundcover between the sidewalk and the building
frontage, excluding vehicular driveways.

f. Page 14 and 15: Delete the table beginning with “Sign Type” in the
upper left cell, delete the remaining paragraph, and replace with
the below language:


Page 157
(1) “To govern signage on the site, the development shall
adhere to the following conditions, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department:”

(a) The wall mural (lifestyle graphic) shall not exceed
112 square feet in area and 46 feet from grade to
the top of the sign.

(b) Prior to the issuance of any sign permits within the
PUD, a Comprehensive Sign Plan will be adopted
in accordance with the procedures in Section
705.E.2.

(c) Signs over 56 feet from grade to the top of the sign
shall be incorporated into the approved or
amended Comprehensive Sign Plan.

(d) In order to reduce lighting impacts to nearby
residential uses, the maximum luminance
(brightness) for all wall signs shall be 60 nits
measured at the sign face. The maximum color
temperature for all wall signs shall be 4,000 Kelvin.
Sign permit applicants shall provide certification
from a qualified registrant of compliance with these
lighting standards prior to the issuance of permits
for wall signs.

(e) The high-rise wall signs shall have a dimmer
control installed and the signs’ luminance shall be
dimmed 50% at 10:30 pm.

2. The driveway on Thomas Road shall be restricted to a three-quarter
access prohibiting left-turn egress constructed per City of Phoenix
modified Standard Detail P1243-1 or other alternatives, as approved or
modified by the Street Transportation Department.

3. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during
construction, the developer shall immediately cease all ground-
disturbing activities within a 33-foot radius of the discovery, notify the
City Archaeologist, and allow time for the Archaeology Office to properly
assess the materials.

4. The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the
proposed development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460
obstruction analysis review process, prior to construction permit
approval, as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department.


Page 158
5. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence,
and operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future
owners or tenants of the property. The form and content of such
documents shall be according to the templates and instructions provided
which have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

6. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with
the Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be
included in the rezoning application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March,

2021.




________________________________
MAYOR




ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:



Page 159
____________________________City Manager


Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (1 Page)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 160
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-64-19-4

A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 2
NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN,
MARICOPA COUNTY ARIZONA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS;

(APN 118-44-005A)
The West half of Lot 3, of WEST BALTIMORE HEIGHTS, according to the plat of
record in the office of the County Recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, in Book 4 of
Maps, Page 31;
EXCEPT the North 9 feet thereof.

AND
(APN 118-44-007A and 118-44-008A)
Lot 4, of WEST BALTIMORE HEIGHTS, according to the plat of record in the
Office of the County Recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona in Book 4 of Maps,
Page 31;
EXCEPT the West 31 feet of the South 3 feet of the North 12 feet;
and EXCEPT the North 9 feet.




Page 161
Page 162



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-54-20-6 -
Southeast Corner of 44th Street and Devonshire Avenue (Ordinance G-6814)

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
R-O (Residential Office - Restricted Commercial District) to R-O HP (Residential Office
- Restricted Commercial District, Historic Preservation) for a Historic Preservation
Overlay for Avery (Frank and Emma) House.

Summary
Current Zoning: R-O (Residential Office - Restricted Commercial District)
Proposed Zoning: R-O HP (Residential Office - Restricted Commercial District, Historic
Preservation)
Acreage: 0.58 acres
Proposal: Historic Preservation Overlay for Avery (Frank and Emma) House

Owner: Rafterhouse Holdings, LLC
Applicant: City of Phoenix, Historic Preservation Commission
Representative: Helana Ruter, Planning and Development Department

Staff Recommendation: Approval.
HPC Action: The Historic Preservation Commission heard this case on Dec. 21, 2020,
and recommended approval, by a vote of 9-0.
VPC Action: The Camelback East Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan.
5, 2021, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 17-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021, and
recommended approval, per the Historic Preservation Commission and Camelback
East Village Planning Committee recommendations, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Southeast corner of 44th Street and Devonshire Avenue
Council District: 6
Parcel Address: 4203 N. 44th St.




Page 163

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 164
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-54-20-6) FROM R-O (RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE – RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO R-O
HP (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE – RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT, HISTORIC PRESERVATION).


____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 0.58-acre site located on the southeast

corner of 44th Street and Devonshire Avenue in a portion of Section 19, Township 2

North, Range 4 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed

from “R-O” (Residential Office – Restricted Commercial District) to “R-O HP”

(Residential Office – Restricted Commercial District, Historic Preservation).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.




Page 165
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March 2021.



________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager



Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (2 Pages)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 166
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-59-20-6

Lot 1 of ARCADIA 44, according to Book 1321 of Maps, Page 21, records of Maricopa
County, Arizona;
EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the City of Phoenix, a municipal corporation, in
Recording No. 2017-
701466 and re-recorded in Recording No. 2017-836144, and more particularly described
as:
A portion of the Southeast quarter of Section 19, Township 2 North, Range 4 East of the
Gila and Salt
River Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona, and more particularly described as
follows:
COMMENCING at the intersection of Devonshire Avenue and 44th Street, found Brass
Cap in Handhole,
whence the Center Quarter Corner of said Section 19, Brass Cap in Handhole, bears
North 00 degrees
03 minutes 58 seconds East, a distance of 1830.89 feet;
THENCE South 00 degrees 03 minutes 58 seconds West (Basis of Bearings), as shown
on the Final Plat
for “ARCADIA 44”, recorded in Book 1321 of Maps, page 21, Official Records of Maricopa
County,
Arizona departing from said intersection of Devonshire Avenue and 44th Street, along the
monument line
of 44th Street, to the Southwest subdivision corner of said “ARCADIA 44”, a distance of
165.01 feet;
THENCE South 88 degrees 27 minutes 00 seconds East, a distance of 42.01 feet to a
point on the
Easterly right-of-way line of said 44th Street, said point also being the Southwest property
corner of Lot 1
of “ARCADIA 44”, and the POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE North 00 degrees 03 minutes 58 minutes East, along said Easterly right-of-way
line of 44th
Street, a distance of 128.65 feet, to a point of non-tangent curvature, concave
Southeasterly, having a
radius of 19.49 feet, and a radial bearing of South 63 degrees 44 minutes 57 seconds
East;
THENCE Northeasterly along the arc of said curve and said right-of-way line to the right,
through a
central angle of 65 degrees 17 minutes 57 seconds, a distance 22.21 feet to a point of
tangency on the
Southerly right-of-way line of said Devonshire Avenue;
THENCE South 88 degrees 27 minutes 00 seconds East, along said Southerly right-of-
way line of
Devonshire Avenue, a distance of 5.53 feet to a point of non-tangent curvature, having a
radius of 20.00



Page 167
feet and a radial bearing of South 1 degrees 33 minutes 00 seconds West;
THENCE Southwesterly along the arc of said curve to the left, through a central angle of
91 degrees 29
minutes 02 seconds, to a point of tangency, a distance 31.93 feet;
THENCE South 00 degrees 03 minutes 58 seconds West, along a line being parallel with
and 45.00 feet
Easterly of, as measured perpendicular to the monument line of said 44th Street, to a
point on the
Southerly subdivision boundary line of said “ARCADIA 44”, a distance of 119.48 feet;
THENCE North 88 degrees 27 minutes 00 seconds West, along said Southerly
subdivision boundary line,
a distance of 3.0 feet returning to said POINT OF BEGINNING.




Page 168
Page 169



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-59-20-6 -
Approximately 130 Feet West of the Southwest Corner of 16th Street and
Bethany Home Road (Ordinance G-6815)

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
PSC (Planned Shopping Center) to C-2 (Intermediate Commercial District) to allow C-
2 commercial uses.

Summary
Current Zoning: PSC (Planned Shopping Center)
Proposed Zoning: C-2 (Intermediate Commercial District)
Acreage: 8.80 acres
Proposal: Rezone to C-2 for commercial uses

Owner: James Shough, 16 Bethany Station, LLC
Applicant: Bill Allison, Withey Morris, PLC
Representative: Bill Allison, Withey Morris, PLC

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Camelback East Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan.
5, 2021 and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation with modifications
and an additional stipulation by a vote of 18-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021 and
recommended approval, per the Camelback East Village Planning Committee
recommendation with an additional stipulation by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Approximately 130 feet west of the southwest corner of 16th Street and Bethany Home
Road
Council District: 6
Parcel Address: 1503, 1515, 1517 and 1525 E. Bethany Home Road; and 5808, 5810,
5812 and 5826 N. 16th St.




Page 170

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 171
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-59-20-6) FROM PSC (PLANNED
SHOPPING CENTER) TO C-2 (INTERMEDIATE
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT).


____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 8.80-acre site located approximately 130 feet

west of the southwest corner of 16th Street and Bethany Home Road in a portion of

Section 16, Township 2 North, Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit

“A”, is hereby changed from “PSC” (Planned Shopping Center) to “C-2” (Intermediate

Commercial District).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,



Page 172
violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. Prior to the issuance of permits for tenant improvements, the existing
landscape planters along the 16th Street and Bethany Home Road frontages
shall be replenished to provide landscaping in accordance with the C-2 zoning
district standards for planting type, size and quantity. Trees along the street
frontages shall be planted adjacent to the sidewalk to provide shade/thermal
comfort for pedestrians, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

2. Prior to the issuance of permits for tenant improvements, existing parking lot
planters shall be replenished to meet Zoning Ordinance commercial standards
per Section 623.E of the Zoning Ordinance, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

3. Bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle space per 25 vehicle parking spaces,
with a maximum of 25 spaces shall be provided on site. These may be inverted
U-bicycle racks, artistic style racks (in adherence to the City of Phoenix
Preferred Designs in Appendix K or the Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan)
or “Outdoor/Covered Facilities” for guests and employees. These facilities shall
be located near building entrances, installed per the requirements of Section
1307.H of the Zoning Ordinance, and approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

4. The bus stop pad, shelter, furniture, and refuse container along southbound
16th Street, south of Bethany Home Road, shall be retained in its current
condition. Trees shall be placed near the bus stop pad to provide 50 percent
shade coverage at maturity. Any relocation of the bus stop pad or associated
structures shall be as approved by the Public Transit Department.

5. Clearly defined, accessible pedestrian pathways shall be provided to connect
building entrances, public sidewalks, and bus stops, using the most direct route
for pedestrians, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. Where pedestrian pathways cross drive aisles, they shall be constructed of
decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, or other pavement treatments
that visually contrast with the adjacent parking and drive aisle surfaces, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. All pedestrian pathways shall be shaded by trees or shade structures to
provide a minimum of 75 percent shade at maturity.

8. The developer shall dedicate a 10-foot-wide sidewalk easement for the south
side of Bethany Home Road, prior to any future major site plan amendment on
the site.



Page 173
9. The developer shall dedicate a 10-foot-wide sidewalk easement for the west
side of 16th Street, prior to any future major site plan amendment on the site.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development
with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands,
landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.

11. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

12. Any residential development shall require public notice and hearings through
the Planning Hearing Officer process, per Section 506.B.3. of the Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance, including a recommendation from the Camelback East
Village Planning Committee.

13. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March 2021.



________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk




Page 174
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager



Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (3 Pages)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 175
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-59-20-6

A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE IN A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16,
MONUMENTED BY A CITY OF PHOENIX BRASS CAP IN A HAND HOLE FROM
WHICH THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16, MONUMENTED
BY A CITY OF PHOENIX BRASS CAP IN A HAND HOLE BEARS SOUTH 89
DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2667.67 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, A
DISTANCE OF 168.20 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
40.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PROPOSED LOT 2 AND TO A
POINT ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE
DOCUMENT RECORDED IN RECORDING NO. 2008-0511498, RECORDS OF
MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 18 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
155.00 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
128.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 18 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
155.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF
BETHANY HOME ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN
DOCKET 3715, PAGES 541, 542, 543 AND 544, RECORDS OF MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID
SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 128.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING OF PROPOSED LOT 2.

Parcel 2:

A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE IN A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:



Page 176
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16,
MONUMENTED BY A CITY OF PHOENIX BRASS CAP IN A HAND HOLE FROM
WHICH THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16, MONUMENTED
BY A CITY OF PHOENIX BRASS CAP IN A HAND HOLE BEARS SOUTH 89
DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2667.67 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, A
DISTANCE OF 296.20 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
40.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF PROPOSED LOT 3;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 18 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
155.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
128.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 18 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
27.00 FEET TO A POINT OF THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY
DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENT RECORDED IN RECORDING NO. 2008-0511498,
RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 128.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 16TH STREET AS DESCRIBED IN THE
DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN DOCKET 3715, PAGES 542, 543 AND 544, RECORDS
OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 18 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID
PARALLEL LINE, A DISTANCE OF 491.45 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY
LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 13 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID
SOUTHERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 626.27 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16;

THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST, ALONG THE
WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, A DISTANCE
OF 110.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
WESTERLY, WHOSE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 00 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 54
SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET AND TO A POINT ON THE



Page 177
EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 15TH STREET AS DESCRIBED IN THE
DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN DOCKET 3715, PAGES 542, 543 AND 544, RECORDS
OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;

THENCE THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES ALONG SAID RIGHT OF
WAY LINE:

THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AND NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE
LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 130 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 33
SECONDS, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 90.86 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
TANGENT REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, WHOSE RADIUS POINT
BEARS NORTH 50 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 21 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
23.53 FEET;

THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 33 SECONDS, AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 16.49 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY;

THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
418.50 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 44 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 47 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
14.28 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BETHANY
HOME ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN DOCKET 3715,
PAGES 541,542, 543 AND 544, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID
SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 49.83 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
130.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
176.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
130.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF
BETHANY HOME ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN
DOCKET 3715, PAGES 542, 543 AND 544, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,
ARIZONA;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID
SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING OF PROPOSED LOT 3.




Page 178
Page 179



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-9-20-6
(Willowick PUD) - Southwest Corner of 16th and Colter Streets (Ordinance G-
6816)

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of
the City of Phoenix, by adopting Rezoning Application Z-9-20-6 and rezone the site
from C-O (Commercial Office - Restricted Commercial District) to PUD (Planned
Unit development) to allow multifamily, retail, and office uses.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-O (Commercial Office - Restricted Commercial District)
Proposed Zoning: PUD (Planned Unit Development)
Acreage: 3.45 acres
Proposal: Rezone to PUD to allow multifamily, retail, and office

Owner: Willowick Square Owner, LLC
Applicant: Stephen W. Anderson, Gammage and Burnham
Representative: Stephen W. Anderson, Gammage and Burnham

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Camelback East Village Planning Committee heard this case on
Jan. 5, 2021, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote
of 18-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021, and
recommended approval, per the Camelback East Village Planning Committee
recommendation with an additional stipulation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Southwest corner of 16th and Colter Streets
Council District: 6
Parcel Address: 5150 N. 16th St.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning
and Development Department.

Page 180
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN
(CASE Z-9-20-6) FROM C-O (COMMERCIAL OFFICE –
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO PUD (PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT).


____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 3.45-acre site located at the southwest

corner of 16th Street and Colter Street in a portion of Section 16, Township 2 North,

Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed from “C-

O” (Commercial Office – Restricted Commercial District) to “PUD” (Planned Unit

Development).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,



Page 181
violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Willowick PUD reflecting the changes
approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning and
Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request.
The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the Development
Narrative date stamped December 21, 2020, as modified by the following
stipulations:

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add
the following: Hearing draft: December 21, 2020; City Council adopted:
[Add adoption date].

2. The developer shall retain the right-of-way and bus stop pad on southbound 16th
Street south of Colter Street. The bus stop pad shall be compliant with City of
Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a minimum depth of 10 feet. The bus stop
pad shall be spaced from the intersection of 16th Street and Colter Street as per
Development Department

3. The developer shall utilize the existing driveway along 16th Street on Parcel No.
APN 162-12-001X to access the site. The developer shall record a cross access
easement between Parcel Nos. 162-12-001X and 162-12-009, to allow for
ingress from the existing driveway south of the site. The agreement is to be
reviewed and approved by the Planning and Development Department prior to
recordation with Maricopa County.

4. The developer shall submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to the City for this
development. No preliminary approval of plans shall be granted until the study
had been reviewed and approved by the City. Additional off-site improvements
and right-of-way dedications may be required as identified in the approved traffic
study. Development shall be responsible for the cost associated with these
improvements and dedications.

5. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development
with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands,
landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.

6. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.




Page 182
7. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition
207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa
County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March,

2021.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager



Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (2 Pages)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 183
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-9-20-6

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN PHOENIX, IN THE
COUNTY OF MARICOPA, STATE OF ARIZONA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST
OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY,
ARIZONA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE 40
FOOT STRIP OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF PHOENIX BY DEED
RECORDED FEBRUARY 13, 1970 IN DOCKET 7998, PAGE 117 AND THE NORTH
LINE OF THE SOUTH 210.00 FEET OF SAID NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16;

THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 58 MINUTES 27
SECONDS WEST 293.32 FEET;

THENCE PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTH HALF, NORTH 0
DEGREES 04 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST 240.49 FEET;

THENCE PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTH HALF OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16,
SOUTH 89 DEGREES 58 MINUTES 25 SECONDS WEST 22.00 FEET TO THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 1, AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE CITY
OF PHOENIX, AS RECORDED IN DOCKET 8661, PAGE 117;

THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL 1 AND ITS NORTHERLY
PROLONGATION, NORTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST 180.00
FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 30.00 FEET OF SAID NORTH HALF;

THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 89 DEGREES 58 MINUTES 25
SECONDS EAST 271.65 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 83.00 FEET OF
SAID NORTH HALF;

THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, SOUTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00
SECONDS EAST 10.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 40.00 FEET OF
SAID NORTH HALF;

THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 89 DEGREES 58 MINUTES 25
SECONDS EAST 43.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID 40 FOOT STRIP OF
LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED IN SAID DOCKET 7998, PAGE 117;




Page 184
THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, SOUTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00
SECONDS EAST 410.49 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;

EXCEPT THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO LIV CAMELBACK AT 16TH, LLC IN
RECORDING NO. 20160854027, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA.




Page 185
Page 186



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-5-20-7 -
Southwest Corner of 32nd Drive and Jackson Street (Ordinance G-6817)

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
-1 SP (Light Industrial, Special Permit) to A-1(Light Industrial) to allow A-1 for light
industrial uses (dispatch office and heavy truck parking).

Summary
Current Zoning: A-1 SP (Light Industrial, Special Permit)
Proposed Zoning: A-1(Light Industrial)
Acreage: 3.66 acres
Proposal: Rezone to A-1 for light industrial uses (dispatch office and heavy truck
parking)

Owner: MAT Transport, Inc.
Applicant: Milos Minic, Integrated Design
Representative: Milos Minic, Integrated Design

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Estrella Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan. 19,
2021, and recommended approval, per the Addendum A Staff Report, by a vote of 6-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021, and
recommended approval, per the Estrella Village Planning Committee recommendation,
with an additional stipulation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Southwest corner of 32nd Drive and Jackson Street
Council District: 7
Parcel Address: 3333 W. Jackson St.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.



Page 187
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN
(CASE Z-5-20-7) FROM A-1 SP (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, SPECIAL
PERMIT) TO A-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL).

____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 3.66-acre site located at the southwest

corner of 32nd Drive and Jackson Street in a portion of Section 11, Township 1 North,

Range 2 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed from

“A-1 SP” (Light Industrial, Special Permit) to “A-1” (Light Industrial).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,

violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:



Page 188
1. The maximum building height shall be 30 feet.

2. A minimum building setback of 50 feet shall be required along the north
property line, exclusive of parking areas, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

3. A minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area shall be provided for the eastern 100
feet of the north property line.

4. A minimum 20-foot-wide landscape area shall be provided for the western 550
feet along the north property line.

5. The Jackson Street landscape area shall be developed to the following
standards, as approved by the Planning and Development Department:


a. Minimum 25 percent 1-inch caliper, minimum 50 percent 2-inch caliper,
and minimum 25 percent 3-inch caliper size evergreen trees planted 20
feet on center or in equivalent groupings.

b. Trees shall be oriented in a manner that provides the maximum shade
possible to the adjacent sidewalk.

c. Two-inch and 3-inch caliper size trees shall be located in a manner that
screens semi-truck parking or outdoor uses from public view as much as
possible.

d. Minimum of five, 5-gallon shrubs per tree.

e. Where utility conflicts exist, an alternative solution consistent with a
pedestrian environment shall be provided.

6. The developer shall dedicate right-of-way and construct a 50-foot radius cul-
de-sac at the western end of Jackson Street along with required improvements,
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.




Page 189
8. The developer shall record a Notice of Prospective Purchasers of Proximity to
Airport in order to disclose the existence and operational characteristics of
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX) to future owners of the
property.

9. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to construction
permit approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that
the development received a “No Hazard Determination” from the FAA. If
temporary equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the
permanent structure a separate Form 7460-1 shall be submitted to the FAA
and a “No Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

10. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

11. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from Phase
I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

12. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

13. The following minimum elements shall be provided and maintained by the
property owner within proximity to Jackson Street, as approved by the Planning
and Development Department:

a. A community garden of no less than 600 square feet in area containing
irrigation;

b. A seating node containing a minimum of one seating element or bench.

14. All surface parking areas shall be shaded to achieve a minimum of 25 percent
shade at maturity, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

15. The applicant shall pursue approval of alternative paving that minimizes heat
for the surface parking area. If traditional paving is utilized, other design
solutions such as increased shade may be utilized to shade parking areas to
minimize heat absorption, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

16. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the



Page 190
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March,

2021.


________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney




REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager



Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (1 Page)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 191
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-5-20-7

WITHIN A PORTION OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 2 EAST OF
THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY,
ARIZONA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PARCEL NO. 1:

THE EAST HALF OF LOT 8, BLOCK 3 AND THE WEST HALF OF LOT 6, BLOCK 4,
WORMSERS ADDITION, ACCORDING TO BOOK 2 OF MAPS, PAGE 16,
RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA.

EXCEPT THE SOUTH 82.5 FEET OF SAID
LOTS 6 AND 8. PARCEL NO. 2:
THAT PORTION OF OSBORN AVENUE, NOW KNOWN AS 33RD AVENUE, SHOWN
ON THE PLAT OF WORMSERS ADDITION, ACCORDING TO BOOK 2 OF MAPS,
PAGE 16, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, LYING BETWEEN THE
EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 25 FEET SOUTH OF
THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 8 IN BLOCK 3, AND THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION
OF A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 82.5 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 8,
BLOCK 3, SAID WORMSERS ADDITION.




Page 192
Page 193



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Public Hearing and Ordinance Adoption - Amend City Code - Rezoning
Application Z-13-20-8 - Northwest Corner of State Route 143 and Washington
Street (Ordinance G-6819)

Request to hold a public hearing on a proposal to amend the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix, by adopting Rezoning
Application Z-13-20-8 and rezone the site from A-2 TOD-1 (Industrial District, Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to A-2 (Industrial District) to remove the
TOD-1 overlay and allow industrial uses. This is a companion case to Z-TA-6-20-8 and
should be heard first.

Summary
Current Zoning: A-2 TOD-1 (Industrial District, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay
District One)
Proposed Zoning: A-2 (Industrial District)
Acreage: 1.75 acres
Proposal: Removal of the TOD-1 overlay and allow industrial uses

Owner: Werner L.Schlecht Trust
Applicant: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA
Representative: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA

Staff Recommendation: Denial. In the event of an approval action, mitigating
stipulations are recommended.
VPC Action: The Camelback East Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan.
5, 2021, and recommended approval, per the staff recommended stipulations, by a
vote of 17-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021, and
recommended approval per the Camelback East Village Planning Committee
recommendation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street
Council District: 8
Parcel Address: 4632 E. Washington St.


Page 194


Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 195
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-13-20-8) FROM A-2 TOD-1 (INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT, INTERIM TRANSIT-ORIENTED ZONING
OVERLAY DISTRICT ONE ) TO A-2 (INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT).


____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 1.75-acre site located on the northwest

corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street in a portion of Section 7, Township 1

North, Range 4 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed

from “A-2 TOD-1” (Industrial District, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District

One) to “A-2” (Industrial District).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,



Page 196
violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. Conceptual site plan and elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer through the public hearing process for stipulation modification prior to
preliminary site plan approval. This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes
only. Specific development standards and requirements may be determined by the
Planning Hearing Officer and the Planning and Development Department.

2. The below stipulated streetscape landscaping standards must be planted prior to the
issuance of any permits.

3. The sidewalk along Washington Street shall be a minimum of eight feet wide and shall
be detached with a minimum 10-foot-wide landscaped strip between the sidewalk and
the back of curb, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. A
sidewalk easement shall be dedicated as necessary.

4. A minimum of 75 percent of the sidewalk shall be shaded.

5. The 10-foot-wide continuous landscape area located between the sidewalk and back
of curb shall include minimum 3-inch caliper, large canopy single-trunk shade trees
(limbed-up a minimum of 10-feet clear from finish grade), planted 20 feet on center or
in equivalent groupings, and minimum 5-gallon shrubs with a maximum mature height
of 2-feet providing 75 percent live cover, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

6. The required landscape setback adjacent to the southern property line shall be
planted to the following minimum standards, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. Twenty-five percent 3-inch caliper large-canopy trees and 75 percent 4-inch
caliper large-canopy trees, planted 20 feet on-center or in equivalent groupings;

b. Five 5-gallon shrubs per tree, and additional shrubs or live groundcover, shall
be provided to a minimum seventy-five percent live cover at mature size.

7. Bollard path lights shall be provided every ten feet along the public sidewalk on
Washington Street, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. A bicycle repair station (“fix it station”) shall be provided on the site, in close proximity
to the public sidewalk. The station shall include but not limited to: standard repair tools
affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair stand which allows
pedals and wheels to spin freely while making adjustments to the bike, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.




Page 197
9. All outdoor storage shall be completely screened with a decorative wall, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping
and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

11. The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the proposed
development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460 obstruction analysis
review process, prior to construction permit approval, as per plans approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

12. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or tenants
of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be according to the
templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.

13. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to clearing
and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

14. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the Phase I
data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified archaeologist,
determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the applicant shall conduct
Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

15. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March 2021.




Page 198
________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager



Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (1 Page)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 199
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-13-20-8


THAT PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST OF SECTION
7, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, GILA AND SALT RIVER MERIDIAN,
MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, SAID
CORNER BEING A BRASS CAP IN A HANDHOLE;

THENCE SOUTH 89°23'30" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 7,
1167.63 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 00%36"30" WEST 40.00 FEET TO THE EXISTING SOUTH RIGHT
OF WAY LINE OF VAN BUREN STREET;

THENCE SOUTH 00°16'30" WEST 329.09 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;

THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 00°16'30" WEST 742.47 FET TO THE NORTHERLY
RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET;

THENCE FROM A LOCAL TANGENT BEARING OF SOUTH 83°32'20" EAST, ALONG
A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 11514.32 FEET, A DISTANCE OF
28.02 FEET TO A POINT THEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A";

THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE 100.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 09°15'48" WEST, 767.58 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

THERE SHALL BE NO RIGHT OR EASEMENT OF ACCESS TO STATE ROUTE 143
(HOHOKAM FREEWAY) OR TO WASHINGTON STREET, PROVIDED HOWEVER,
THAT ACCESS SHALL BE PERMITTED TO SAID WASHINGTON STREET WEST OF
THE AFORESAID POINT "A".




Page 200
Page 201
$WWDFKPHQW$




Staff Report Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020

Camelback East Village Planning December 1, 2020
Committee Meeting Date:
Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 7, 2021

Request From: A-2 TOD-1 (Industrial District, Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District
One) (1.75 acres)
Request To: A-2 (Industrial District) (1.75 acres)

Proposed Use: Removal of the TOD-1 zoning overlay

Location: Northwest corner of State Route 143 and
Washington Street

Owner: Werner L. Schlecht Trust

Applicant/Representative William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA

Staff Recommendation: Denial. In the event of an approval action,
mitigating stipulations are recommended.

General Plan Conformity
General Plan Land Use Map
Mixed Use/Camelback East Village Core
Designation
Major Arterial with 50-foot north half
Washington Street
Street Map Light Rail Transit street
Classification Approximately 315-
State Route 143 Freeway
foot west half

CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; OPPORTUNITY SITES; LAND
USE PRINCIPLE: Support reasonable levels of increased intensity, respectful of
local conditions and surrounding neighborhoods.
The proposed removal of the TOD-1 overlay on the site opens up the possibility of
several intense uses which are not compatible with the type of development desired
along the light rail line. The uses that are prohibited by the overlay include auto-
oriented and bulk exterior storage uses, as well as others that do not promote the




Page 202
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


walkable environment desired within close proximity to the light rail line.

STRENGTHEN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY CORE VALUE; MANUFACTURING &
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT; LAND USE PRINCIPLE: Support the expansion of
industrial zoning in targeted industrial areas.
Although the City of Phoenix General Plan encourages the expansion of industrial
zoning in certain areas, the light rail corridor is not an intended industrial area.
Development along this corridor should incorporate a mix of uses and promote a
pedestrian-friendly environment, which the overlay district achieves.

CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS CORE
VALUE; HEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS; DESIGN PRINCIPLE: Establish design
standards and guidelines for parking lots and structures, setback and buildto
lines, blank wall space, shade, and other elements affecting pedestrians, to
encourage pedestrian activity and identify options for providing pedestrian-
oriented design in different types of development.
Removing the TOD-1 overlay from this site will remove standards designed to ensure
the development of a pedestrian-friendly environment, including maximum building
setbacks, wider sidewalks, frontage activation, and enhanced shade standards.



Applicable Plans, Overlays and Initiatives
Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District – See Background Item No. 4.

44th Street Corridor Specific Plan – See Background Item No. 12.

Gateway TOD Policy Plan – See Background Item No. 13.

Complete Streets Guiding Principles – See Background Item No. 14.

Tree and Shade Master Plan – See Background Item No. 15.

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Page 203
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning
Land Use Zoning
On Site Vacant lot A-2 TOD-1
North Freeway landscape area C-3 TOD-1
South Pueblo Grande Museum A-2 HP-L
State Route 143 freeway,
East A-2, PUD
multifamily residential
C-2 M-R, C-2 M-R HGT/WVR
West Office park, multifamily residential
DNS/WVR TOD-1


A-2 (Industrial District) *if variance required

Standards Requirements Proposed Site Plan
Gross Acreage - 1.75
Maximum Density (du/ac) N/A N/A
Maximum Building Height 56-foot maximum, up to
80 feet allowed with a use Not shown on site plan
permit
Minimum lot width N/A N/A
Minimum Building Setbacks Washington Street:
25 feet Not shown on site plan
Rear and sides: None
Lot Coverage N/A Not shown on site plan
Common Areas N/A Not shown on site plan




Page 204
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


Background/Issues/Analysis

1. This is a request to rezone a 1.75-
acre site located on the northwest
corner of State Route 143 (SR-143)
and Washington Street from A-2
TOD-1 (Industrial District, Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay
District One) to A-2 (Industrial
District) to remove the Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay to
allow development of the site per A-
2 standards. The vacant site is
directly adjacent to the SR-143
freeway to the east, a corporate
office park with multifamily
residential to the west and is across
the street from the Pueblo Grande
Museum. Directly to the north and
east of the site are freeway
landscape areas.
Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
This request has a companion
Text Amendment (Z-TA-6-20), which
proposes to amend Section 662.B. (Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District
One) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to remove the subject property from the TOD-1
Overlay District.




Page 205
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


2. The site has a General Plan Land
Use Map designation of Mixed Use.
This same designation is present to
the north and west of the site. To
the east of the site is the
Transportation designation along
the SR-143 freeway and, to the
south of the site, is Parks / Open
Space – Public designation, where
the Pueblo Grande Museum is
located.

Several of the uses permitted in the
A-2 district are not consistent with
the Mixed Use designation.
However, a General Plan Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department

amendment is not needed as the
site is less than 10 gross acres in
size. Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department


The site is also located within the
boundaries of a Village Primary
Core, as shown on the General
Plan Land Use Map. Village Cores
are intended to be the clearly
identifiable central focus for the
village with pedestrian-oriented mix
of land uses. The TOD-1 overlay
provides standards that are
consistent with this intent.




Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department




Page 206
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


3. The proposed site plan does not depict any
development on the site, nor does the project
narrative call out a specific use for the
property. The primary intent of this rezoning
request, per the applicant’s narrative, is to
“allow the property owner to maximize the
property’s value.”

Given the size and shape of this property, any
proposed development under the A-2
development standards would likely require
several variance requests through the Zoning
Adjustment hearing process.

Further, there is no access to the site depicted
on the site plan. With its proximity to the
freeway off-ramp, the Arizona Department of
Transportation has commented that it will not
permit a new driveway to be constructed at
this location.

Staff recommends denial of the request but
does acknowledge that the site's location,
dimensions and limited access points, are
challenges for its development as standalone
parcel. Removal of the Overlay will provide
some flexibility for the property owner to
pursue redevelopment options.
Source: Bowman Consulting


4. The property is located within the boundaries of the TOD-1 overlay district (Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One), which is intended to encourage an
appropriate mixture and density of activity around transit stations to increase ridership
along the Central Phoenix/East Valley Light Rail Corridor and promote alternative
modes of transportation to the automobile. The secondary purpose of the TOD-1 is to
decrease auto-dependency and mitigate the effects of congestion and pollution. This
request proposes to remove this overlay district, which will effectively remove all of the
development standards that provide for a pedestrian-friendly environment and
encourage a mix of uses on sites adjacent to the light rail. The following background
items are in relation to staff’s recommended stipulations in the event of an approval
action for this case. The stipuations are deisgned to provide the streetscape and
pedestrian improvements envisioned in the TOD overlay.




Page 207
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


5. Due to the unknown nature of the envisioned development for the site, staff is
recommending that any proposed conceptual site plan and elevations be reviewed by
the Planning Hearing Officer through a public hearing process, per Stipulation No. 1.
This will allow the community to be involved in any potential development of the site, as
no specific development plans are proposed with this entitlement case.

6. The proposed removal of the TOD-1 overlay will result in the loss of many development
standards that are intended to provide an enhanced pedestrian environment. To ensure
that pedestrian activity continues to be encouraged along the light rail line, staff is
recommending that a minimum eight-foot-wide sidewalk be provided along Washington
Street, with a minimum 10-foot wide landscape strip between the sidewalk and the back
of curb. To further ensure a pedestrian friendly environment, staff is recommending that
a minimum of 75 percent of the sidewalk be shaded, and that the landscape area
between the sidewalk and back of curb be planted with robust landscaping. These are
addressed in Stipulation Nos. 3, 4, and 5.

7. The site is located approximately 1,200 feet from the nearest light rail station. Per the
standards set forth in the TOD-1 overlay, this site should have a maximum front yard
setback of 12 feet to provide for an activated street frontage. The removal of this overlay
will revert setback standards back to the underlying A-2 district, which calls for a
minimum 25-foot front yard setback, moving any potential active uses away from the
street.

An active street frontage with buildings close to the street will not be possible under the
A-2 district. Therefore, staff is recommending that the landscape setback within this
front yard setback area be planted with large-canopy trees. This will help provide a
more pedestrian-friendly environment as shade from tree canopies will be provided for
those walking or biking along the light rail corridor. This is addressed in Stipulation No.
6.

8. The streetscape development and landscape standards are intended to mitigate the
impact of a heavy industrial zoning district and its associated uses on the pedestrian
realm. To ensure that these protective standards are upheld, staff is recommending that
all streetscape landscaping be planted prior to the issuance of any permits, per
Stipulation No. 2. This includes applications for sign permits.

9. A key element of creating a pedestrian-friendly environment is ensuring that individuals
feel safe when walking along city streets. This site is located in close proximity to a
freeway overpass to the east, which creates safety concerns for pedestrians. To provide
individuals with a sense of security when walking this stretch of Washington Street, staff
is recommending that pedestrian-scale lighting be provided in the form of bollard lights,
along the sidewalk. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 7.

10. The site is located along the light rail line and in close proximity to the light rail station at




Page 208
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


44th Street and Washington Street This is an area where multi-modal transportation
methods are encouraged, as there are also bus lines that run on Washington Street, as
well as bike lanes on both sides of the street. As such, staff is recommending that a
bicycle repair station be provided in close proximity to the sidewalk to serve individuals
who choose to travel by bike, per Stipulation No. 8.

11. Should the TOD-1 overlay be removed from this site, all A-2 uses restricted by the
overlay will be permitted on the site. One such use is outdoor storage. To reduce the
impact of potential outdoor storage on the pedestrian environment, staff is
recommending that outdoor storage be completely screened by a decorative wall. This
is addressed in Stipulation No. 9.

PLANS, OVERLAYS & INITIATIVES
12. 44th Street Corridor Specific Plan
The site is located within the boundaries of the 44th Street Corridor Specific Plan.
Completed in 1991, this Plan established a framework to provide compatibility for new
development within the corridor. Although this specific parcel is not called out in the
plan, it is directly adjacent to properties that are designated as MU3 (Mixed Use 3). The
MU3 designation envisions land uses such as multifamily residential, retail, office, and
hotels. To the south are properties designated as P/OS (Park and Open Space), which
include public land developed as park with improved landscape areas, active and
passive recreational facilities and public gathering functions. To the east, on the other
side of the SR 143 freeway, are properties designated as MU1 (Mixed Use 1), which is
lower in intensity than MU3, and includes land uses such as multifamily residential,
single-family residential, and public/quasi-public uses.




Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department




Page 209
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


13. Gateway TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) Policy Plan
The site is located within the Gateway TOD District, the boundaries for which are the
Union Pacific Railroad on the south, Loop 202 on the north, Interstate 10 on the west
and SR-143 on the east. The policy plan adopted for the Gateway TOD District provides
a blueprint for fully achieving the transformative potential of light rail in a sustainable
manner. Changes advocated in the plan can lower transportation costs for residents,
create new business opportunities, encourage active, healthy lifestyles, ensure Phoenix
increases its competitive advantage in the global marketplace, and improve prosperity
by growing the economy in locations with existing infrastructure and public services. In
order to realize the implementation of the Vision and Master Plan for the Gateway TOD
District, one key recommendation is the implementation of a form-based zoning code.
The standards within the TOD-1 overlay district are similar to many streetscape
standards found within the Walkable Urban Code.

The site lies on the eastern edge of the policy
plan and has not been given a specific master
development vision or a desired Walkable Urban
Code Transect District. However, this site is
within 1,200 feet of the nearest light rail station
on 44th Street and Washington Street, and
should be held to the same standards that have
been outlined for the properties that are located
within a 10-minute walking radius around light rail
stations.




Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
14. Complete Streets Guiding Principles
In 2014, the City of Phoenix City Council adopted the Complete Streets Guiding
Principles. The principles are intended to promote improvements that provide an
accessible, safe, connected transportation system to include all modes, such as
bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and vehicles. To support these principles related to
pedestrian connectivity and safety, staff is recommending that an eight-foot wide
detached sidewalk be provided along Washington Street, that bollard path lights be
provided along this sidewalk, and that a bicycle repair station be installed in close
proximity to the right-of-way. These are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 3, 7, and 8.




Page 210
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


15. Tree and Shade Master Plan
The Tree and Shade Master Plan has a goal of treating the urban forest as
infrastructure to ensure that trees are an integral part of the city’s planning and
development process. By investing in trees and the urban forest, the city can reduce its
carbon footprint, decrease energy costs, reduce storm water runoff, increase
biodiversity, address the urban heat island effect, clean the air, and increase
property values. In addition, trees can help to create walkable streets and vibrant
pedestrian places. To support the City’s urban forestry efforts, staff is recommending
that the applicant provide robust landscaping within the landscape area between the
sidewalk and back of curb, as well as within the landscape setback along Washington
Street, to provide a minimum of 75 percent shade along the public sidewalk. Further,
staff is recommending that the landscaping be planted before the issuance of any
permits to ensure that trees and shade are provided regardless of the type of
development on the site. These recommendations are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 2,
4, 5, and 6.

16. Reimagine Phoenix
As part of the Reimagine Phoenix initiative, the City of Phoenix is committed to
increasing the waste diversion rate to 40 percent by 2020 and to better manage its solid
waste resources. This request does not propose any specific use on the site, and thus
does not address how it will manage its trash and recycling waste.

COMMUNITY INPUT SUMMARY
17. At the time this staff report was written, staff has received one letter from a neighboring
property owner citing concerns with traffic generation on this site.

INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
18. The Street Transportation Department does not support the removal of the TOD overlay
as the request does not support or align with the City Council approved Complete
Streets Guidelines adjacent to transit. This department has also stated that development
of the site should continue to meet the minimum 75 percent shade standard for public
sidewalks, per Stipulation No. 4, and has required that all streets are constructed with all
required elements and in compliance with ADA standards, which is addressed in
Stipulation No. 10.

19. The site is located within the noise contour area of Phoenix Sky Harbor International
Airport and will be subject to overflights of aircraft operating at the airport and that flight
tracks and traffic patterns may extend several miles beyond the airport boundary. A
Notice to Purchasers will be required that discloses the existence, and operational
characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport to future owners or tenants of
the property. Further, due to the close proximity of the site to the airport, the developer
shall be required to provide documentation prior to final site plan approval that the
development has received a “No Hazard Determination” from the Federal Aviation
Administration. These requirements are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 11 and 12.




Page 211
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


20. The site is located in a larger area identified as being archaeologically sensitive. If
further review by the City of Phoenix Archaeology Office determines the site and
immediate area to be archaeologically sensitive, and if no previous archaeological
projects have been conducted within this project area, it is recommended that
archaeological Phase I data testing of this area be conducted. Phase II archaeological
data recovery excavations may be necessary based upon the results of the testing. A
qualified archaeologist must make this determination in consultation with the City of
Phoenix Archaeologist. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during
construction, all ground disturbing activities must cease within a 33-foot radius of the
discovery and the City of Phoenix Archaeology Office must be notified immediately and
allowed time to properly assess the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation Nos. 13,
14 and 15.

OTHER
21. Development and use of the site is subject to all applicable codes and ordinances.
Zoning approval does not negate other ordinance requirements. Other formal actions
such as, but not limited to, zoning adjustments and abandonments, may be required

Findings

1. The site's location, dimensions and limited access points are challenges for its
development as a standalone parcel. Removal of the Overlay would provide some
flexibility for the property owner to pursue redevelopment options.

2. Several of the uses permitted in the A-2 district are not consistent with the Mixed Use
General Plan Land Use Map designation.

3. The development standards of the A-2 district are not conducive to a pedestrian-friendly
environment, which should be the goal of new developments along the light rail
corridor.

4. The uses prohibited by the TOD-1 overlay are all permitted by right in the underlying
zoning district. These uses are not compatible with transit-oriented development and
should continue to be discouraged along the light rail line.

Stipulations, in the event of an approval action

1. Conceptual site plan and elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer through the public hearing process for stipulation modification prior to
preliminary site plan approval. This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes
only. Specific development standards and requirements may be determined by the
Planning Hearing Officer and the Planning and Development Department.

2. The below stipulated streetscape landscaping standards must be planted prior to the




Page 212
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


issuance of any permits.

3. The sidewalk along Washington Street shall be a minimum of eight feet wide and shall
be detached with a minimum 10-foot-wide landscaped strip between the sidewalk and
the back of curb, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. A
sidewalk easement shall be dedicated as necessary.

4. A minimum of 75 percent of the sidewalk shall be shaded.

5. The 10-foot-wide continuous landscape area located between the sidewalk and back
of curb shall include minimum 3-inch caliper, large canopy single-trunk shade trees
(limbed-up a minimum of 10-feet clear from finish grade), planted 20 feet on center or
in equivalent groupings, and minimum 5-gallon shrubs with a maximum mature height
of 2-feet providing 75 percent live cover, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

6. The required landscape setback adjacent to the southern property line shall be
planted to the following minimum standards, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. Twenty-five percent 3-inch caliper large-canopy trees and 75 percent 4-inch
caliper large-canopy trees, planted 20 feet on-center or in equivalent groupings;
b. Five 5-gallon shrubs per tree, and additional shrubs or live groundcover, shall
be provided to a minimum seventy-five percent live cover at mature size.

7. Bollard path lights shall be provided every ten feet along the public sidewalk on
Washington Street, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. A bicycle repair station (“fix it station”) shall be provided on the site, in close proximity
to the public sidewalk. The station shall include but not limited to: standard repair tools
affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair stand which allows
pedals and wheels to spin freely while making adjustments to the bike, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

9. All outdoor storage shall be completely screened with a decorative wall, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping
and other incidentals as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.




Page 213
Staff Report: Z-13-20-8
December 30, 2020


11. The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the proposed
development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460 obstruction analysis
review process, prior to construction permit approval, as per plans approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

12. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or tenants
of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be according to the
templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.

13. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to clearing
and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

14. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the Phase I
data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified archaeologist,
determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the applicant shall conduct
Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

15. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

Writer
Sofia Mastikhina
December 30, 2020

Team Leader
Samantha Keating

Exhibits
Sketch Map
Aerial
Community Correspondence (7 pages)
Site plan date stamped March 13, 2020




Page 214
C-2 M-R R1-6
PKG/WVR*
GATEW
MELVIN ST
C-2
R-3
Z-18-86



AY BLV
Z-19-86
M-R * C-1 C-2 *
C-2 M-R
Z-26-88


D 47TH ST 47TH PL
Z-43-86
Z-19-86 Z-9-88 Z-421-84

PKG/WVR *
Z-146-86
Z-26-88
Z-25-88
C-3
VAN BUREN ST


C-3 C-2 M-R *
Z-116-87 C-3
C-3
C-2 T
M-R *
Z-385-84
C-2 M-R *
H
ST
PUD *
Z-83-04
Z-353-85 MONROE ST
HGT/WVR Z-SP-25-86
Z-354-85 DNS/WVR Z-SP-12-86
Z-17-16
Z-116-87
D
U Z-6-07 C-2 M-R *


44TH ST 48TH ST
PO
A-1
N Z-176-86

A-2
T
C
IR
C-2 M-R *
Z-390-84
Z-SP-10-88

WASH IN GTON
ST


A-2
A-2
A-2 £
¤143


HP-L A-2
Z-110-03
A-1 A-2
HP-L
Z-110-03




IMiles
Z-13-20 NORTHERN AVE

GLENDALE AVE

BETHANY HOME RD

0.075 0.0375 0 0.075
CAMELBACK EAST VILLAGE 7TH ST
CAMELBACK RD
INDIAN SCHOOL RD

16TH ST
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 8 THOMAS RD
SR 51

24TH ST
MC DOWELL RD


32ND ST
VAN BUREN ST


40TH ST
WASHINGTON ST


64TH ST
48TH ST 56TH ST



APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA
FROM:
A-2 TOD-1 ( 1.75 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO. DATE:
7/28/2020
Z-13-20 REVISION DATES:



GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
1.75 Acres QS 10-38 F-11 TO: A-2 ( 1.75 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
A-2 TOD-1 N/A N/A
A-2 N/A N/A

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-13-20.mxd
Page 215
C-2 M-R R1-6
PKG/WVR*
GATEW
MELVIN ST
C-2
R-3
Z-18-86



AY BLV
Z-19-86
M-R * C-1 C-2 *
C-2 M-R
Z-26-88


D 47TH ST 47TH PL
Z-43-86
Z-19-86 Z-9-88 Z-421-84

PKG/WVR *
Z-146-86
Z-26-88
Z-25-88
C-3
VAN BUREN ST


C-3 C-2 M-R *
Z-116-87 C-3
C-3
C-2 T
M-R *
Z-385-84
C-2 M-R *
H
ST
PUD *
Z-83-04
Z-353-85 MONROE ST
HGT/WVR Z-SP-25-86
Z-354-85 DNS/WVR Z-SP-12-86
Z-17-16
Z-116-87
D
U Z-6-07 C-2 M-R *


44TH ST 48TH ST
PO
A-1
N Z-176-86

A-2
T
C
IR
C-2 M-R *
Z-390-84
Z-SP-10-88

WASH IN GTON
ST


A-2
A-2
A-2 £
¤143


HP-L A-2
Z-110-03
A-1 A-2
HP-L
Z-110-03


Maricopa County Assessor's Office




IMiles
Z-13-20 NORTHERN AVE

GLENDALE AVE

BETHANY HOME RD

0.075 0.0375 0 0.075
CAMELBACK EAST VILLAGE 7TH ST
CAMELBACK RD
INDIAN SCHOOL RD

16TH ST
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 8 THOMAS RD
SR 51

24TH ST
MC DOWELL RD


32ND ST
VAN BUREN ST


40TH ST
WASHINGTON ST


64TH ST
48TH ST 56TH ST



APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA
FROM:
A-2 TOD-1 ( 1.75 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO. DATE:
7/28/2020
Z-13-20 REVISION DATES:



GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
1.75 Acres QS 10-38 F-11 TO: A-2 ( 1.75 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
A-2 TOD-1 N/A N/A
A-2 N/A N/A

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-13-20.mxd
Page 216
Sofia Mastikhina

From: Begley, Sara
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 4:34 PM
To: wel@tblaw.com; Sofia Mastikhina
Subject: Request to rezone 143 & Washington
Attachments: NWC Washington St and SR-143 TS.pdf; 0734_001.pdf

Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged


DearMr.LallyandMs.Mastikhina,

WeareinreceiptofMr.Lally’scorrespondenceregardingtherequestedrezoningoftheparcellocatedat143&
Washington.CopperPointInsuranceCompanyownsthebuildingat4600E.WashingtonSt.,directlywestofthesubject
parcel.Attachedpleasefindatrafficstudycommissionedin2009whentherewasaproposeddevelopmentofthat
parcel.Theengineerconcludedthatgiventhelocationoftheparcel,therecanbenosafeaccesstotheparcel:






Weareconcernedforthesafetyofthepublicandourtenantsandguestsenteringandexiting4600E.Washingtonand
urgeyoutoconsidertheattachedreportasyouevaluatethereͲzoningrequest.

Sincerely,

SaraM.Begley
EVP,GeneralCounsel&ChiefComplianceOfficer
T:602.631.2136|C:602.751Ͳ3228




3030N3rdStreet|Phoenix,AZ85012
copperpoint.com[copperpoint.com]|f[facebook.com]|t[twitter.com]|
[copperpoint.com]  in[linkedin.com]
AnA.M.BestAͲratedcompany


CONFIDENTIALITYNOTICE:ThiseͲmailtransmission(andtheattachmentsaccompanyingit)maycontainconfidential
informationbelongingtothesenderwhichisprotectedbytheattorneyͲclientprivilege.Theinformationisintendedonly
fortheuseoftheintendedrecipient.Ifyouarenottheintendedrecipient,youareherebynotifiedthatanydisclosure,
copying,distributionorthetakingofanyactioninrelianceonthecontentsofthisinformationisstrictlyprohibited.Any
unauthorizedinterceptionofthistransmissionisillegalunderthelaw.Ifyouhavereceivedthistransmissioninerror,
pleasepromptlynotifythesenderbyreplyeͲmail,andthendestroyallcopiesofthetransmission.



Page 217
August 31, 2009

Mike Curley
Earl, Curley, & Lagarde, P.C.
3101 North Central Avenue
Suite 1000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012


RE: NWC of Washington Street and State Route 143 Traffic Statement


Dear Mr. Curley:

CivTech has been retained to analyze the potential traffic impacts of a five story, 54,000 square
foot, office development proposed to be located on the northwest corner of Washington Street
and State Route 143 (SR-143) in Phoenix, Arizona.

The purpose of this traffic statement is to address adjacent development questions and
concerns. The specific objectives of this traffic statement are to:
x Determine the trip generation potential of the development;
x Discuss travel routes to/from the subject parcel;
x Discuss potential driveway locations and requirements; and,
x Determine the level of development that could work from a traffic perspective.

TRIP GENERATION
The potential trip generation for the site was estimated utilizing equations developed by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provided in Trip Generation, 8th Edition. Table 1
summarizes the trip generation potential of the 54,000 square foot office. Detailed trip
generation calculations are included as an Attachment.

Table 1: Trip Generation Potential of the 54,000 Square Foot Office
ITE Land Weekday Trips Generated
Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Use Code Size Units Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
General
710 54,000 SF 832 101 14 115 24 116 140
Office

The results of the trip generation summarized in Table 1 reveal that the 54,000 square foot
office could generate as many as 832 daily trips, with 115 trips occurring during the AM peak
hour and 140 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.



CivTech Inc. • 10605 North Hayden Road • Suite 140 • Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
Office 480-659-4250 • Fax 480-659-0566
Page 218
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


EXISTING CONDITIONS
The subject property occupies approximately one acre, and is bordered by Washington Street to
the south and the southbound off-ramp of SR-143 to the east and north. An existing office
development, Washington Corporate Center, occupies the site immediately to the west of the
subject parcel.

Washington Street is an east-west roadway located along the southern boundary of the site.
Within the study area, Washington Street provides three travel lanes in each direction separated
by a raised center median. The light rail exists in the median of Washington Street adjacent to
the subject property. Per the City of Phoenix Major Traffic Flow 2005 Average Weekday Traffic
Map Washington Street near SR-143 carries approximately 30,900 vehicles per day.

ACCESS TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
Access to/from the subject property would only be available from/to westbound Washington
Street. Accessing the site driveway from other directions will be somewhat circuitous, as will
exiting the site being destined to the north, south, and/or east.

Site patrons arriving to the site from eastbound Washington Street will need to travel past the
site, and make a U-turn at SR-143 to access the site driveway.

The easiest way for site patrons arriving from the north to access the site, is to travel
southbound on SR-143, and turn right onto Washington Street to access the site driveway.

Site patrons arriving to the site from the south will likely travel northbound on SR-143, and turn
left onto Washington Street. From northbound 44th Street, site patrons would need to turn right
onto Washington Street, and make a U-turn at SR-143 to access the site driveway.

Site patrons leaving the site destined to the east will need to travel westbound on Washington
Street, and make a U-turn at 44th Street to travel to the east.

Site patrons leaving the site destined to the north will need to travel westbound on Washington
Street, and make a right-turn at 44th Street to travel to the north. Another option would be to
travel westbound on Washington Street, make a U-turn at 44th Street, and make a left-turn at
SR-143 to travel to the north.

Site patrons leaving the site destined to the south will need to travel westbound on Washington
Street, and make a left-turn at 44th Street to travel to the south on SR-153. Another option
would be to travel westbound on Washington Street, make a U-turn at 44th Street, and make a
right-turn at SR-143 to travel to the south.

SUBJECT PROPERTY DRIVEWAY
ADOT Access Control
The site has approximately 125 feet of frontage along Washington Street. The subject parcel
has no other street frontage. The site frontage along Washington Street falls within the Arizona
Department of Transportation (ADOT) access control, as the full access control typically
extends along the crossroad a minimum of 300 feet beyond the end of the ramp radius return.
Per the ADOT Roadway Design Guidelines (January 2007), if the 300 foot minimum is not
practical to obtain, as much distance as practical should be obtained, however, an absolute




Page 219
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


minimum of 100 feet should be obtained and any access provided within the remaining distance
to 300 feet should be accessed only by right-in/right-out traffic. Based on the ADOT access
control policy, any site access point would be limited to a right-in/right-out only driveway, and
would need to be located on the western half of the site frontage.

Driveway Corner Clearance
The distance between adjacent driveways and intersections must be adequate to allow
driveway vehicles to safely queue, accelerate, decelerate, and cross conflicting traffic streams
without excessive interference with through traffic, or traffic using the adjacent intersection. Per
the ITE Transportation and Land Development, the minimum distance downstream from a
signalized intersection to a right-in/right-out access is 230 feet. No driveway anywhere along
the site frontage will meet this criterion.

Deceleration Lane
Right-turn deceleration lanes are typically required when the outside lane has an expected
volume of greater than 250 vehicles per hour and the right-turn volumes is greater than 55
vehicles per hour. Assuming a right-in/right-out driveway along Washington Street is permitted
to allow access to the subject property, 101 vehicles would be expected to enter the
development during the AM peak hour. This would satisfy the above stated criterion; therefore,
a westbound right-turn deceleration lane would be recommended.

ADOT requires a minimum 100 feet storage length for turn lanes; however, a standard right-turn
deceleration lane cannot be accommodated at this location due to the configuration of the
southbound SR-143 off-ramp at Washington Street. Even if the site driveway is located as far to
the west of the property as possible, and a minimal transition length is used, there is only
approximately 40-50 feet of storage available for the westbound right-turn lane.

Based on all of the previously presented information, it is the opinion of CivTech that safe,
efficient, and reasonably convenient access to the subject parcel cannot be obtained due to the
limiting site characteristics and traffic design elements.

ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
An alternative calculation was conducted to determine the level of development that could work
from a traffic perspective for the subject site. Because a right-turn deceleration lane cannot be
accommodated at the site driveway, and a right-turn deceleration lane is warranted when the
right-turn volume is greater than 55 vehicles per hour, 55 vehicles entering the development in
the peak hour was used as the limiting factor. The alternative development scenario trip
generation potential was estimated utilizing equations developed by ITE in the Trip Generation,
8th Edition. To achieve less than 55 vehicles entering during the peak hour, it was determined
that the office development would need to be reduced to 45 percent of the original square
footage. This would result in a 24,300 square foot office building. The potential trip generation
for the 24,300 square foot office building is summarized in Table 2. Detailed trip generation
calculations are included as an Attachment.




Page 220
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


Table 2: Trip Generation Potential of the 24,300 Square Foot Office
ITE Land Weekday Trips Generated
Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Use Code Size Units Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
General
710 24,300 SF 450 54 7 61 18 89 107
Office

The results of this trip generation reveal that the reduced 24,300 square foot office could
generate as many as 450 daily trips, with 61 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 107
trips occurring during the PM peak hour. The results of the alternative development scenario
trip generation summarized in Table 2 also reveal that the number of vehicles entering the
development in the AM peak hour falls just under the threshold volume (55 vehicles per hour)
warranting a right-turn deceleration lane.

CONCLUSIONS
From the above, the following has been concluded.
x The results of the trip generation calculations reveal that if the proposed 54,000 square foot
office could generate as many as 832 daily trips, with 115 trips occurring during the AM
peak hour and 140 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.
x Access to/from the subject property will only be available from/to westbound Washington
Street. Accessing the site driveway from other directions will be somewhat circuitous, as will
exiting the site being destined to the north, south, and/or east.
x Based on the ADOT access control policy, any site access point would be limited to a right-
in/right-out only driveway, and would need to be located on the western half of the site’s 125
foot frontage along Washington Street.
x No driveway anywhere along the site frontage will meet the minimum distance requirement
of 230 feet downstream from a signalized intersection to a right-in/right-out driveway.
x Assuming a right-in/right-out driveway along Washington Street is permitted to allow access
to the subject property, a westbound right-turn deceleration lane, with a minimum 100 feet
storage length, would be recommended.
x Even if the site driveway is located as far to the west of the property as possible, and a
minimal transition is used, there is likely only approximately 40-50 feet of storage available
for the westbound right-turn lane.
x Based on all of the previously presented information, it is the opinion of CivTech that safe,
efficient, and reasonably convenient access to the subject parcel cannot be obtained due to
the limiting site characteristics and traffic design elements. In addition, an driveway along
the site frontage would not meet the recommended criteria per ITE Transportation and Land
Development.
x It was determined that the office development would need to be reduced to 45 percent of the
original square footage (to 24,300 square feet), in order to keep the number of vehicles
entering the development in the AM peak hour under the threshold volume (55 vehicles per
hour) warranting a right-turn deceleration lane.




Page 221
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


In closing, this traffic statement has been prepared to address adjacent development questions
and concerns and to allow the adjacent development to understand the traffic impacts of the
proposed development. Should you wish to discuss this information further, please contact me
at (480) 659-4250.


Sincerely,

CivTech Inc.



Dana L. Chamberlin, P.E., PTOE
Project Manager/Traffic Engineer


Attachments




Page 222



 

  


 


 




 
















































 

Page 223

 


 
 
 
 

 

















Δ





 In Maricopa County: (602) 263-1100
Attachment C




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-13-20-8

Date of VPC Meeting January 5, 2021
Request From A-2 TOD-1
Request To A-2
Proposed Use Removal of TOD overlay
Location Northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington
Street
VPC Recommendation Approval subject to staff’s recommended mitigating
stipulations
VPC Vote 17-0


VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Ms. Sofia Mastikhina, staff, provided an overview of the requests, including the
location, current zoning and General Plan Land Use Map designation, and surrounding
land uses and zoning districts. She explained that the site is designated as Mixed Use
on the General Plan Land Use Map and is also located within the boundaries of the
Village Core. The proposal to remove the TOD overlay from the site to allow all uses of
the underlying A-2 district is not consistent with either, as it would allow outdoor uses
such as junk yards, car washes, outdoor storage, and billboards. She explained that the
purpose of the TOD overlay district is to encourage an appropriate mixture and density
of activity around transit stations to increase ridership along the Central Phoenix/East
Valley Light Rail Corridor and promote alternative modes of transportation to the
automobile, and to decrease auto-dependency and mitigate the effects of congestion
and pollution. The overlay achieves these goals by outlining development standards
that promote a pedestrian-friendly environment and encourage a mix of uses on sites
adjacent to the light rail. The site is also located in the Gateway TOD Policy Plan, which
provides guidance for development along and in close proximity to the light rail line. In
order to realize the Vision and Master Plan for the Gateway TOD District, one key
recommendation is the implementation of a form-based zoning code. The standards
within the TOD-1 overlay district are similar to many streetscape standards found within
the Walkable Urban Code. The site is also located within the boundaries of the 44th
Street Corridor Specific Plan. Although this parcel is not specifically designated on the
plan, it is adjacent to sites that are designated for a variety of mixed-use uses. Ms.
Mastikhina then presented the site plan submitted with the application, which does not
show any development plans. She explained that vehicular access to the site is not a


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882

Page 224
possibility as the Arizona Department of Transportation has deemed it to be too close to
the freeway off-ramp. Staff recognizes that the site’s location, dimensions and limited
access are challenges for its development as a standalone parcel and that the removal
of the overlay could provide some flexibility for the property owner to pursue
redevelopment options. She then outlined staff’s findings and recommendation for
denial. She then listed the stipulations created by staff in the event that an approval
action is taken.

Mr. William Lally, representative with Tiffany and Bosco, P.C., provided a summary of
the request. He explained that the site is a small sliver located on Washington Street
along SR 143, and is a leftover of the condemnation and construction of the freeway.
The site has a width of 120 feet along Washington Street, so some of the uses
permitted in the underlying A-2 district simply would not be able to sit on the site, in
addition to the lack of vehicular access due to its proximity to the freeway off-ramp.
These same restrictions would preclude any type of transit-oriented development from
being realistically built on the site. Additionally, the property owner has previously
sought access to the site from the northern portion of the property, from the neighboring
property to the west, but it was not feasible. He explained that the property has been
vacant since the 1980’s and purchased in the 1990’s with the intent to develop.
However, the size and location of the property render it unusable. The property owner
had approached them to discuss what would be possible here, such as freeway
signage. He explained that the proposal is to simply remove the overlay to revert the
zoning back to what it’s always been. The TOD overlay stops at the freeway, and all
transit-oriented developments should and have been developed to the west of this end
line. This property does not have the potential to have any type of transit-oriented
development on it. He then addressed staff’s recommended stipulations, pointing out
that a lot of the pedestrian-related improvements that would be required by the overlay
will now be required with this removal. As this site is not conducive to transit-oriented
development, these improvements would likely never have been built. With this
proposal, these improvements such as the sidewalks and landscaping will be built out.

Mr. Daniel Sharaby asked if the applicant has any exhibits showing what the site will
look like with the streetscape improvements. Mr. Lally replied that they do not, as they
only received the stipulations when the staff report was published about a week ago.

Ms. Ashley Nye explained that she understands why staff is recommending denial of
this case, but that the mitigating stipulations will result in a much better streetscape,
ultimately. Given this, she expressed her support for approving the project.

Mr. Tom O’Malley asked for confirmation that no vehicular access is possible on the
site, and that there really only is one use that would be viable on the site. Mr. Lally
confirmed that ADOT would not permit a new driveway so close to the freeway off-ramp,
and that the use envisioned for the site is a freeway sign. Mr. O’Malley asked Mr. Lally
to explain the history of the attempted sign permit on the site. Mr. Lally explained that
they had submitted an application for a variance and a use permit to allow an off-
premise sign with additional height on the site in 2017. The application underwent staff
review and was approved by the Zoning Adjustment Hearing Officer but, due to an
appeal and a subsequent Board of Adjustment hearing, further research was done and
the restriction on off-premise signage by the TOD overlay was uncovered.



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 225
Mr. Vic Grace asked if the sidewalk improvements will be equal to what exists on the
property to the west of the site, or if they will go above and beyond it. Mr. Lally replied
that, per staff’s recommended stipulations, the streetscape improvements will include a
wider sidewalk that will be detached, 75 percent tree shade, bollard lights, and a bicycle
repair facility – all of which exceed what exists along the property to the west.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Wally Graham stated that the applicant has owned this land since March 4, 1998,
when he purchased it from the State Department of Transportation. The deed from this
transaction outlines the access restriction due to the proximity to SR 143, so the
property owner was aware of this when purchasing the property, as well as the odd
shape of the property, which has not changed since then. In 2009, the property owner
tried to erect a building on the lot, which was denied. He stated that the proposal at
hand is to erect an 85-foot tall billboard and agreed with staff’s recommendation for
denial. Mr. Graham then addressed the TOD removal, stating the overlay was part of
the Reinvent Phx initiative, which aims to make areas of Phoenix more walkable and
was approved by this committee. He stated that this removal is unprecedented and that,
if approved, other property owners will want to do the same. He asked that the
committee deny this application.

Mr. Lally addressed Mr. Graham’s statement regarding no changes having occurred to
the property since the property owner purchased it. He stated that one major change
has occurred since then, which was the approval of the TOD overlay in 2009, which
immediately restricted what could be developed on the site. Further, the overlay
removal would only allow a maximum 70-foot-tall billboard, not 85 feet as Mr. Graham
stated, and any request to go above that would be required to go through the Zoning
Adjustment Hearing process. Additionally, at least three other overlay removal cases
have been processed recently, so this is not unprecedented.

Motion:
Mr. Tom O’Malley made a motion to approve the request subject to the staff
recommended mitigating stipulations. Mr. Daniel Sharaby seconded the motion.

Vote: 17-0
Motion passes with committee members Swart, Abbott, Augusta, Bair, Thraen,
Crawford, Eichelkraut, Grace, McKee, Miller, Nye, O’Malley, Paceley, Rush, Scher,
Sharaby, and Tribken in favor.

STIPULATIONS:

1. Conceptual site plan and elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer through the public hearing process for stipulation modification prior to
preliminary site plan approval. This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes
only. Specific development standards and requirements may be determined by the
Planning Hearing Officer and the Planning and Development Department.

2. The below stipulated streetscape landscaping standards must be planted prior to the
issuance of any permits.



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 226
3. The sidewalk along Washington Street shall be a minimum of eight feet wide and shall
be detached with a minimum 10-foot-wide landscaped strip between the sidewalk and
the back of curb, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. A
sidewalk easement shall be dedicated as necessary.

4. A minimum of 75 percent of the sidewalk shall be shaded.

5. The 10-foot-wide continuous landscape area located between the sidewalk and back
of curb shall include minimum 3-inch caliper, large canopy single-trunk shade trees
(limbed-up a minimum of 10-feet clear from finish grade), planted 20 feet on center or
in equivalent groupings, and minimum 5-gallon shrubs with a maximum mature height
of 2-feet providing 75 percent live cover, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

6. The required landscape setback adjacent to the southern property line shall be
planted to the following minimum standards, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. Twenty-five percent 3-inch caliper large-canopy trees and 75 percent 4-inch
caliper large-canopy trees, planted 20 feet on-center or in equivalent groupings;
b. Five 5-gallon shrubs per tree, and additional shrubs or live groundcover, shall
be provided to a minimum seventy-five percent live cover at mature size.

7. Bollard path lights shall be provided every ten feet along the public sidewalk on
Washington Street, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. A bicycle repair station (“fix it station”) shall be provided on the site, in close proximity
to the public sidewalk. The station shall include but not limited to: standard repair tools
affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair stand which allows
pedals and wheels to spin freely while making adjustments to the bike, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

9. All outdoor storage shall be completely screened with a decorative wall, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping
and other incidentals as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

11. The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the proposed
development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460 obstruction analysis
review process, prior to construction permit approval, as per plans approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

12. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or tenants
of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be according to the
templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 227
13. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to clearing
and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

14. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the Phase I
data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified archaeologist,
determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the applicant shall conduct
Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

15. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 228
Attachment D


REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
February 4, 2021

ITEM NO: 5
DISTRICT NO.: 8
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-13-20-8 (Companion Case Z-TA-6-20-8)
Location: Northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street
From: A-2 TOD-1
To: A-2
Acreage: 1.75
Proposal: Removal of the TOD-1 zoning overlay
Applicant: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA
Owner: Werner L.Schlecht Trust
Representative: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Denial.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Camelback East 1/5/2021 Approval, with the staff recommended stipulations. Vote: 17-
0.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the Camelback East Village
Planning Committee recommendation.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Howard made a MOTION to approve Z-13-20-8, per the
Camelback East Village Planning Committee recommendation.

Maker: Howard
Second: McGabe
Vote: 8-0
Absent: Johnson
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. The site's location, dimensions and limited access points are challenges for its
development as a standalone parcel. Removal of the Overlay would provide
some flexibility for the property owner to pursue redevelopment options.

2. The development standards of the A-2 district are not conducive to a
pedestrian-friendly environment, which should be the goal of new
developments along the light rail corridor; therefore, mitigating stipulations
have been recommended to require a pedestrian-friendly environment.




Page 229
3. The underlying A-2 zoning district is not consistent with the General Plan Land
Use Map designation of Mixed Use; however, the site is under 10 acres.

Stipulations:

1. Conceptual site plan and elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Hearing Officer through the public hearing process for stipulation
modification prior to preliminary site plan approval. This is a legislative review
for conceptual purposes only. Specific development standards and
requirements may be determined by the Planning Hearing Officer and the
Planning and Development Department.

2. The below stipulated streetscape landscaping standards must be planted prior
to the issuance of any permits.

3. The sidewalk along Washington Street shall be a minimum of eight feet wide
and shall be detached with a minimum 10-foot-wide landscaped strip between
the sidewalk and the back of curb, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department. A sidewalk easement shall be dedicated as
necessary.

4. A minimum of 75 percent of the sidewalk shall be shaded.

5. The 10-foot-wide continuous landscape area located between the sidewalk and
back of curb shall include minimum 3-inch caliper, large canopy single-trunk
shade trees (limbed-up a minimum of 10-feet clear from finish grade), planted
20 feet on center or in equivalent groupings, and minimum 5-gallon shrubs with
a maximum mature height of 2-feet providing 75 percent live cover, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The required landscape setback adjacent to the southern property line shall be
planted to the following minimum standards, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. Twenty-five percent 3-inch caliper large-canopy trees and 75 percent 4-
inch caliper large-canopy trees, planted 20 feet on-center or in
equivalent groupings;

b. Five 5-gallon shrubs per tree, and additional shrubs or live
groundcover, shall be provided to a minimum seventy-five percent live
cover at mature size.

7. Bollard path lights shall be provided every ten feet along the public sidewalk on
Washington Street, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

8. A bicycle repair station (“fix it station”) shall be provided on the site, in close
proximity to the public sidewalk. The station shall include but not limited to:
standard repair tools affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump; and a
bicycle repair stand which allows pedals and wheels to spin freely while




Page 230
making adjustments to the bike, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

9. All outdoor storage shall be completely screened with a decorative wall, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

11. The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the proposed
development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460 obstruction
analysis review process, prior to construction permit approval, as per plans
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

12. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

13. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

14. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

15. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Tamra Ingersoll at (602) 534-6648, TTY use 7-1-1.




Page 231



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Adoption - Amend City Code - Text Amendment Application Z-TA-6-20-9
(Ordinance G-6820)

Request to hold a public hearing on a proposal to amend the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, Text Amendment Z-TA-6-20-8, amending Section 662.B. (Applicability)
to replace Supplementary Zoning Map 1086 with a new map that removes the
property at the northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street from
the TOD-1 Zoning Overlay. This is a companion case to Z-13-20-8 and should be
heard second.

Summary
The intent of this proposed text amendment is to revise the applicability section for
the TOD-1 District to modify the reference to a specific Supplementary Zoning Map
so that the TOD-1 can be amended by subsequent ordinances.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
Staff recommends denial.
The Camelback East Village Planning Committee heard this item on Jan. 5, 2021
and recommended approval, by a vote of 16-1.
The Planning Commission heard the item on Feb. 4, 2021 and recommended
approval, per the Camelback East Village Planning Committee recommendation, by
a vote of 8-0.

Location
Northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street
Council District: 8
Parcel Addresses: 4632 E. Washington St.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning
and Development Department.




Page 232
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE


ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 662.B. (APPLICABILITY)
OF THE PHOENIX ZONING ORDINANCE TO REPLACE
SUPPLEMENTARY ZONING MAP 1086 WITH A NEW MAP THAT
REMOVES THE PROPERTY AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
STATE ROUTE 143 AND WASHINGTON STREET FROM THE
TOD-1 ZONING OVERLAY.


BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

That Chapter 12, Section 662.B. (Applicability) is amended as follows:

***

B. Applicability. The City of Phoenix’ Transit-Oriented Development Overlay
District (TOD-1) shall apply to lands delineated on the City’s Official
Supplementary Zoning Map 1086 as adopted on November 19, 2003, AND AS
AMENDED BY SUBSEQUENT ORDINANCES. All land uses and development
including, but not limited to buildings, drives, parking areas, landscaping,
streets, alleys, greenways, and pedestrian/bicycle ways designated to be
within this district, shall be located and developed in accordance with the
following provisions:

***

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March 2021.



________________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk




Page 233
-
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager




Page 234
-
Attachment B




Staff Report
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
Z-TA-6-20-8
December 30, 2020

Application Z-TA-6-20-8: Amend Section 662.B. (Applicability) of the Zoning
Ordinance to replace Supplementary Zoning Map 1086 with a new map that removes
the property at the northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street from the
TOD-1 Zoning Overlay.

Location: Northwest corner of State Route 143 and
Washington Street

Acres: 1.75

Owner: Werner L. Schlecht Trust

Applicant/Representative: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA

Village Planning Committee Date: Camelback East – December 1, 2020

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial.

PURPOSE

The intent of this text amendment is to revise the TOD-1 Zoning Overlay map to remove
a site from the Transit Oriented District One and allow all uses restricted by the overlay.

BACKGROUND/ISSUES/ANALYSIS

1. This request is a text amendment to amend the Zoning Ordinance to remove
the TOD-1 Zoning Overlay from the site located on the northwest corner of
State Route 143 (SR-143) and Washington Street. There is a companion
rezoning case, Z-13-20-8, to rezone the 1.75-acre site from A-2 TOD-1
(Industrial District, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to A-2
(Industrial District) to remove the Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay and
allow all uses restricted by the overlay. This text amendment would amend the
applicability section (Section 662.B. of the Zoning Ordinance) to adjust the
boundaries of the TOD-1.




Page 235
Staff Report Z-TA-6-20-8
December 30, 2020




Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department


2. The site is located approximately 1,200 feet east of the light rail station at 44th
Street and Wasnington Street. The proposed removal of the TOD-1 overlay will
result in the loss of many development standards that are intended to provide
an enhanced pedestrian environment along the light rail corridor. An active
street frontage with wide sidewalks, shade trees, and buildings close to the
street will not be possible with the standards of the underlying A-2 district. The
companion rezoning case includes mitigating stipulations, if approved, to
address these concerns and provided for those walking or biking along the light
rail corridor.

PLANS, OVERLAYS & INITIATIVES

3. TOD-1 Overlay
The site is located within the boundaries of the TOD-1 Zoning Overlay (Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One), which is intended to encourage
an appropriate mixture and density of activity around transit stations to
increase ridership along the Central Phoenix/East Valley Light Rail Corridor
and promote alternative modes of transportation to the automobile. The
secondary purpose of the TOD-1 is to decrease auto-dependency and mitigate
the effects of congestion and pollution. This request proposes to remove this
overlay district, which will effectively remove all of the development standards
that provide for a pedestrian-friendly environment and encourage a mix of uses
on sites adjacent to the light rail. Some of the uses that will be permitted with
the removal of this overlay district include, and are not limited to: automobile
service stations, car washes, extensive outside uses, gas stations, animated
signs, and signs advertising goods or services not provided on the premises
(off-premise signs). These, and many of the other uses that will be permitted
once the overlay is removed, are not compatible with the intent of transit-
oriented development and would greatly diminish the pedestrian experience of
this area.

Page 236
Staff Report Z-TA-6-20-8
December 30, 2020



4. 44th Street Corridor Specific Plan
The site is located within the boundaries of the 44th Street Corridor Specific
Plan. Completed in 1991, this Plan established a framework to provide
compatibility for new development within the corridor. Although this specific
parcel is not called out in the plan, it is directly adjacent to properties that are
designated as MU3 (Mixed Use 3). The MU3 designation envisions land uses
such as multifamily residential, retail, office, and hotels. To the south are
properties designated as P/OS (Park and Open Space), which include public
land developed as park with improved landscape areas, active and passive
recreational facilities and public gathering functions. To the east, on the other
side of the SR-143 freeway, are properties designated as MU1 (Mixed Use 1),
which is lower in intensity than MU3, and includes land uses such as
multifamily residential, single-family residential, and public/quasi-public uses.




Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department


5. Gateway TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) Policy Plan
The site is located within the Gateway TOD District, the boundaries for which
are the Union Pacific Railroad on the south, Loop 202 on the north, Interstate
10 on the west and SR-143 on the east. The policy plan adopted for the
Gateway TOD District provides a blueprint for fully achieving the transformative
potential of light rail in a sustainable manner. Changes advocated in the plan
can lower transportation costs for residents, create new business opportunities,
encourage active, healthy lifestyles, ensure Phoenix increases its competitive
advantage in the global marketplace, and improve prosperity by growing the
economy in locations with existing infrastructure and public services. In order to
realize the implementation of the Vision and Master Plan for the Gateway TOD

Page 237
Staff Report Z-TA-6-20-8
December 30, 2020


District, one key recommendation is the implementation of a form-based zoning
code. The standards within the TOD-1 overlay district are similar to many
streetscape standards found within the Walkable Urban Code.

The site lies on the eastern edge of the
policy plan and has not been given a
specific master development vision or a
desired Walkable Urban Code Transect
District. However, this site is within 1,200
feet of the nearest light rail station on
44th Street and Washington Street, and
should be held to the same standards
that have been outlined for the properties
that are located within a 10-minute
walking radius around light rail stations.




COMMUNITY INPUT SUMMARY
6. At the time this staff report was written, staff has received one letter from a
neighboring property owner citing concerns with traffic generation on this site.

CONCLUSION

Staff recommends denial of the request but does acknowledge that the site's location,
dimensions and limited access points, are challenges for its development as a
standalone parcel. Removal of the Overlay will provide some flexibility for the property
owner to pursue redevelopment options. As noted, though, the underlying A-2 zoning
district is not consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of Mixed
Use. The removal of the TOD-1 overlay is not conducive to a pedestrian-friendly
environment, which should be the goal of new development along the light rail corridor.
The uses prohibited by the TOD-1 overlay are all permitted by right in the underlying
zoning district. These uses are not compatible with transit-oriented development and
should continue to be discouraged along the light rail line.




Page 238
Staff Report Z-TA-6-20-8
December 30, 2020


Writers
K. Steadman
Sofia Mastikhina
12/30/2020

Team Leaders
Racelle Escolar
Samantha Keating

Exhibits
Exhibit A - Proposed Language
Sketch Map
Community Correspondence (7 pages)




Page 239
(;+,%,7$

$SSOLFDWLRQ=7$$PHQG6HFWLRQ% $SSOLFDELOLW\ WRUHSODFH
6XSSOHPHQWDU\=RQLQJ0DSZLWKDQHZPDSWKDWUHPRYHVWKHSURSHUW\DWWKH
QRUWKZHVWFRUQHURI6WDWH5RXWHDQG:DVKLQJWRQ6WUHHWIURPWKH72'=RQLQJ
2YHUOD\

6WDII3URSRVHG/DQJXDJH7KDW0D\%H0RGLILHG'XULQJWKH3XEOLF+HDULQJSURFHVVLV
DVIROORZV

$PHQG6HFWLRQ% $SSOLFDELOLW\ E\UHPRYLQJ6XSSOHPHQWDU\=RQLQJ0DS
DQGLQVHUWLQJWKHQHZPDSDVIROORZV



% $SSOLFDELOLW\7KH&LW\RI3KRHQL[¶7UDQVLW2ULHQWHG'HYHORSPHQW2YHUOD\
'LVWULFW 72' VKDOODSSO\WRODQGVGHOLQHDWHGRQWKH&LW\¶V2IILFLDO
6XSSOHPHQWDU\=RQLQJ0DSDVDGRSWHGRQ1RYHPEHU$1'$6
$0(1'('%<68%6(48(1725',1$1&(6$OOODQGXVHVDQGGHYHORSPHQW
LQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWREXLOGLQJVGULYHVSDUNLQJDUHDVODQGVFDSLQJ
VWUHHWVDOOH\VJUHHQZD\VDQGSHGHVWULDQELF\FOHZD\VGHVLJQDWHGWREH
ZLWKLQWKLVGLVWULFWVKDOOEHORFDWHGDQGGHYHORSHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKH
IROORZLQJSURYLVLRQV







Page 240
Text Amendment
CITY OF PHOENIX X PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT X 200 W WASHINGTON ST X PHOENIX, AZ X 85003X (602) 262-6882
APPLICATION NO: TA-6-20 ACRES: 1.75 +/-
VILLAGE: Camelback East COUNCIL DISTRICT: 8
APPLICANT: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA
EXISTING:
A-2 TOD-1 (1.75 +/- Acres)
Z-43-86
Z-9-88
Z-25-88
C-3

Proposed Change Area
E VAN BUREN ST
C-2 M-R *
£
¤
Z-116-87 C-3
TOD-1 PL
TH
C-2 M-R * PUD *
Z-83-04
HGT/WVR Z-SP-25-86
DNS/WVR Z-SP-12-86
Z-17-16
Z-116-87
44th Street Corridor Specific Plan



N 48TH ST
Z-6-07




N 45TH ST
A-2



TOD District - Gateway
E WASH
Canalscape INGTON
S T
A-2
HP-L A-2
TH ST
Z-110-03
A-2
HP L
PROPOSED CHANGE:
A-2 ( 1.75 +/- Acres)
Z-9-88
Z-25-88
C-3
£
44th Street Corridor Specific Plan
E VAN BUREN ST
C-2 M-R *
¤
Proposed Change Area Z-116-87 C-3
L
TOD-1 4T
HP
Transit Overlay District (TOD-1)

N4 C-2 M-R * PUD
Z-83-04
HGT/WVR Z-SP-25-86
DNS/WVR Z-SP-12-86
Z-17-16
Z-116-87
Z-6-07




N 45TH ST
A-2


TOD District - Gateway

E WASHIN
GTON ST
A-2
Canalscape
HP-L A-2
Z-110-03
A-2
HP-L
Page 241
Sofia Mastikhina

From: Begley, Sara
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 4:34 PM
To: wel@tblaw.com; Sofia Mastikhina
Subject: Request to rezone 143 & Washington
Attachments: NWC Washington St and SR-143 TS.pdf; 0734_001.pdf

Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged


DearMr.LallyandMs.Mastikhina,

WeareinreceiptofMr.Lally’scorrespondenceregardingtherequestedrezoningoftheparcellocatedat143&
Washington.CopperPointInsuranceCompanyownsthebuildingat4600E.WashingtonSt.,directlywestofthesubject
parcel.Attachedpleasefindatrafficstudycommissionedin2009whentherewasaproposeddevelopmentofthat
parcel.Theengineerconcludedthatgiventhelocationoftheparcel,therecanbenosafeaccesstotheparcel:






Weareconcernedforthesafetyofthepublicandourtenantsandguestsenteringandexiting4600E.Washingtonand
urgeyoutoconsidertheattachedreportasyouevaluatethereͲzoningrequest.

Sincerely,

SaraM.Begley
EVP,GeneralCounsel&ChiefComplianceOfficer
T:602.631.2136|C:602.751Ͳ3228




3030N3rdStreet|Phoenix,AZ85012
copperpoint.com[copperpoint.com]|f[facebook.com]|t[twitter.com]|
[copperpoint.com]  in[linkedin.com]
AnA.M.BestAͲratedcompany


CONFIDENTIALITYNOTICE:ThiseͲmailtransmission(andtheattachmentsaccompanyingit)maycontainconfidential
informationbelongingtothesenderwhichisprotectedbytheattorneyͲclientprivilege.Theinformationisintendedonly
fortheuseoftheintendedrecipient.Ifyouarenottheintendedrecipient,youareherebynotifiedthatanydisclosure,
copying,distributionorthetakingofanyactioninrelianceonthecontentsofthisinformationisstrictlyprohibited.Any
unauthorizedinterceptionofthistransmissionisillegalunderthelaw.Ifyouhavereceivedthistransmissioninerror,
pleasepromptlynotifythesenderbyreplyeͲmail,andthendestroyallcopiesofthetransmission.



Page 242
August 31, 2009

Mike Curley
Earl, Curley, & Lagarde, P.C.
3101 North Central Avenue
Suite 1000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012


RE: NWC of Washington Street and State Route 143 Traffic Statement


Dear Mr. Curley:

CivTech has been retained to analyze the potential traffic impacts of a five story, 54,000 square
foot, office development proposed to be located on the northwest corner of Washington Street
and State Route 143 (SR-143) in Phoenix, Arizona.

The purpose of this traffic statement is to address adjacent development questions and
concerns. The specific objectives of this traffic statement are to:
x Determine the trip generation potential of the development;
x Discuss travel routes to/from the subject parcel;
x Discuss potential driveway locations and requirements; and,
x Determine the level of development that could work from a traffic perspective.

TRIP GENERATION
The potential trip generation for the site was estimated utilizing equations developed by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provided in Trip Generation, 8th Edition. Table 1
summarizes the trip generation potential of the 54,000 square foot office. Detailed trip
generation calculations are included as an Attachment.

Table 1: Trip Generation Potential of the 54,000 Square Foot Office
ITE Land Weekday Trips Generated
Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Use Code Size Units Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
General
710 54,000 SF 832 101 14 115 24 116 140
Office

The results of the trip generation summarized in Table 1 reveal that the 54,000 square foot
office could generate as many as 832 daily trips, with 115 trips occurring during the AM peak
hour and 140 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.



CivTech Inc. • 10605 North Hayden Road • Suite 140 • Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
Office 480-659-4250 • Fax 480-659-0566
Page 243
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


EXISTING CONDITIONS
The subject property occupies approximately one acre, and is bordered by Washington Street to
the south and the southbound off-ramp of SR-143 to the east and north. An existing office
development, Washington Corporate Center, occupies the site immediately to the west of the
subject parcel.

Washington Street is an east-west roadway located along the southern boundary of the site.
Within the study area, Washington Street provides three travel lanes in each direction separated
by a raised center median. The light rail exists in the median of Washington Street adjacent to
the subject property. Per the City of Phoenix Major Traffic Flow 2005 Average Weekday Traffic
Map Washington Street near SR-143 carries approximately 30,900 vehicles per day.

ACCESS TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
Access to/from the subject property would only be available from/to westbound Washington
Street. Accessing the site driveway from other directions will be somewhat circuitous, as will
exiting the site being destined to the north, south, and/or east.

Site patrons arriving to the site from eastbound Washington Street will need to travel past the
site, and make a U-turn at SR-143 to access the site driveway.

The easiest way for site patrons arriving from the north to access the site, is to travel
southbound on SR-143, and turn right onto Washington Street to access the site driveway.

Site patrons arriving to the site from the south will likely travel northbound on SR-143, and turn
left onto Washington Street. From northbound 44th Street, site patrons would need to turn right
onto Washington Street, and make a U-turn at SR-143 to access the site driveway.

Site patrons leaving the site destined to the east will need to travel westbound on Washington
Street, and make a U-turn at 44th Street to travel to the east.

Site patrons leaving the site destined to the north will need to travel westbound on Washington
Street, and make a right-turn at 44th Street to travel to the north. Another option would be to
travel westbound on Washington Street, make a U-turn at 44th Street, and make a left-turn at
SR-143 to travel to the north.

Site patrons leaving the site destined to the south will need to travel westbound on Washington
Street, and make a left-turn at 44th Street to travel to the south on SR-153. Another option
would be to travel westbound on Washington Street, make a U-turn at 44th Street, and make a
right-turn at SR-143 to travel to the south.

SUBJECT PROPERTY DRIVEWAY
ADOT Access Control
The site has approximately 125 feet of frontage along Washington Street. The subject parcel
has no other street frontage. The site frontage along Washington Street falls within the Arizona
Department of Transportation (ADOT) access control, as the full access control typically
extends along the crossroad a minimum of 300 feet beyond the end of the ramp radius return.
Per the ADOT Roadway Design Guidelines (January 2007), if the 300 foot minimum is not
practical to obtain, as much distance as practical should be obtained, however, an absolute




Page 244
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


minimum of 100 feet should be obtained and any access provided within the remaining distance
to 300 feet should be accessed only by right-in/right-out traffic. Based on the ADOT access
control policy, any site access point would be limited to a right-in/right-out only driveway, and
would need to be located on the western half of the site frontage.

Driveway Corner Clearance
The distance between adjacent driveways and intersections must be adequate to allow
driveway vehicles to safely queue, accelerate, decelerate, and cross conflicting traffic streams
without excessive interference with through traffic, or traffic using the adjacent intersection. Per
the ITE Transportation and Land Development, the minimum distance downstream from a
signalized intersection to a right-in/right-out access is 230 feet. No driveway anywhere along
the site frontage will meet this criterion.

Deceleration Lane
Right-turn deceleration lanes are typically required when the outside lane has an expected
volume of greater than 250 vehicles per hour and the right-turn volumes is greater than 55
vehicles per hour. Assuming a right-in/right-out driveway along Washington Street is permitted
to allow access to the subject property, 101 vehicles would be expected to enter the
development during the AM peak hour. This would satisfy the above stated criterion; therefore,
a westbound right-turn deceleration lane would be recommended.

ADOT requires a minimum 100 feet storage length for turn lanes; however, a standard right-turn
deceleration lane cannot be accommodated at this location due to the configuration of the
southbound SR-143 off-ramp at Washington Street. Even if the site driveway is located as far to
the west of the property as possible, and a minimal transition length is used, there is only
approximately 40-50 feet of storage available for the westbound right-turn lane.

Based on all of the previously presented information, it is the opinion of CivTech that safe,
efficient, and reasonably convenient access to the subject parcel cannot be obtained due to the
limiting site characteristics and traffic design elements.

ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO
An alternative calculation was conducted to determine the level of development that could work
from a traffic perspective for the subject site. Because a right-turn deceleration lane cannot be
accommodated at the site driveway, and a right-turn deceleration lane is warranted when the
right-turn volume is greater than 55 vehicles per hour, 55 vehicles entering the development in
the peak hour was used as the limiting factor. The alternative development scenario trip
generation potential was estimated utilizing equations developed by ITE in the Trip Generation,
8th Edition. To achieve less than 55 vehicles entering during the peak hour, it was determined
that the office development would need to be reduced to 45 percent of the original square
footage. This would result in a 24,300 square foot office building. The potential trip generation
for the 24,300 square foot office building is summarized in Table 2. Detailed trip generation
calculations are included as an Attachment.




Page 245
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


Table 2: Trip Generation Potential of the 24,300 Square Foot Office
ITE Land Weekday Trips Generated
Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Use Code Size Units Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
General
710 24,300 SF 450 54 7 61 18 89 107
Office

The results of this trip generation reveal that the reduced 24,300 square foot office could
generate as many as 450 daily trips, with 61 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 107
trips occurring during the PM peak hour. The results of the alternative development scenario
trip generation summarized in Table 2 also reveal that the number of vehicles entering the
development in the AM peak hour falls just under the threshold volume (55 vehicles per hour)
warranting a right-turn deceleration lane.

CONCLUSIONS
From the above, the following has been concluded.
x The results of the trip generation calculations reveal that if the proposed 54,000 square foot
office could generate as many as 832 daily trips, with 115 trips occurring during the AM
peak hour and 140 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.
x Access to/from the subject property will only be available from/to westbound Washington
Street. Accessing the site driveway from other directions will be somewhat circuitous, as will
exiting the site being destined to the north, south, and/or east.
x Based on the ADOT access control policy, any site access point would be limited to a right-
in/right-out only driveway, and would need to be located on the western half of the site’s 125
foot frontage along Washington Street.
x No driveway anywhere along the site frontage will meet the minimum distance requirement
of 230 feet downstream from a signalized intersection to a right-in/right-out driveway.
x Assuming a right-in/right-out driveway along Washington Street is permitted to allow access
to the subject property, a westbound right-turn deceleration lane, with a minimum 100 feet
storage length, would be recommended.
x Even if the site driveway is located as far to the west of the property as possible, and a
minimal transition is used, there is likely only approximately 40-50 feet of storage available
for the westbound right-turn lane.
x Based on all of the previously presented information, it is the opinion of CivTech that safe,
efficient, and reasonably convenient access to the subject parcel cannot be obtained due to
the limiting site characteristics and traffic design elements. In addition, an driveway along
the site frontage would not meet the recommended criteria per ITE Transportation and Land
Development.
x It was determined that the office development would need to be reduced to 45 percent of the
original square footage (to 24,300 square feet), in order to keep the number of vehicles
entering the development in the AM peak hour under the threshold volume (55 vehicles per
hour) warranting a right-turn deceleration lane.




Page 246
NWC Washington Street and SR-143 Traffic Statement


In closing, this traffic statement has been prepared to address adjacent development questions
and concerns and to allow the adjacent development to understand the traffic impacts of the
proposed development. Should you wish to discuss this information further, please contact me
at (480) 659-4250.


Sincerely,

CivTech Inc.



Dana L. Chamberlin, P.E., PTOE
Project Manager/Traffic Engineer


Attachments




Page 247



 

  


 


 




 
















































 
Page 248



 


 
 
 
 

 

















Δ





 In Maricopa County: (602) 263-1100
Attachment C




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-6-20-8 (Companion Case Z-13-20-8)

Date of VPC Meeting January 5, 2021
Request A-2 TOD-1
Location Northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington
Street
VPC Recommendation Approval
VPC Vote 16-1


VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Ms. Sofia Mastikhina, staff, provided an overview of the requests, including the
location, current zoning and General Plan Land Use Map designation, and surrounding
land uses and zoning districts. She explained that the site is designated as Mixed Use
on the General Plan Land Use Map and is also located within the boundaries of the
Village Core. The proposal to remove the TOD overlay from the site to allow all uses of
the underlying A-2 district is not consistent with either, as it would allow outdoor uses
such as junk yards, car washes, outdoor storage, and billboards. She explained that the
purpose of the TOD overlay district is to encourage an appropriate mixture and density
of activity around transit stations to increase ridership along the Central Phoenix/East
Valley Light Rail Corridor and promote alternative modes of transportation to the
automobile, and to decrease auto-dependency and mitigate the effects of congestion
and pollution. The overlay achieves these goals by outlining development standards
that promote a pedestrian-friendly environment and encourage a mix of uses on sites
adjacent to the light rail. The site is also located in the Gateway TOD Policy Plan, which
provides guidance for development along and in close proximity to the light rail line. In
order to realize the Vision and Master Plan for the Gateway TOD District, one key
recommendation is the implementation of a form-based zoning code. The standards
within the TOD-1 overlay district are similar to many streetscape standards found within
the Walkable Urban Code. The site is also located within the boundaries of the 44th
Street Corridor Specific Plan. Although this parcel is not specifically designated on the
plan, it is adjacent to sites that are designated for a variety of mixed-use uses. Ms.
Mastikhina then presented the site plan submitted with the application, which does not
show any development plans. She explained that vehicular access to the site is not a
possibility as the Arizona Department of Transportation has deemed it to be too close to
the freeway off-ramp. Staff recognizes that the site’s location, dimensions and limited
access are challenges for its development as a standalone parcel and that the removal
of the overlay could provide some flexibility for the property owner to pursue

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882

Page 249
redevelopment options. She then outlined staff’s findings and recommendation for
denial. She then listed the stipulations created by staff in the event that an approval
action is taken.

Mr. William Lally, representative with Tiffany and Bosco, P.C., provided a summary of
the request. He explained that the site is a small sliver located on Washington Street
along SR 143, and is a leftover of the condemnation and construction of the freeway.
The site has a width of 120 feet along Washington Street, so some of the uses
permitted in the underlying A-2 district simply would not be able to sit on the site, in
addition to the lack of vehicular access due to its proximity to the freeway off-ramp.
These same restrictions would preclude any type of transit-oriented development from
being realistically built on the site. Additionally, the property owner has previously
sought access to the site from the northern portion of the property, from the neighboring
property to the west, but it was not feasible. He explained that the property has been
vacant since the 1980’s and purchased in the 1990’s with the intent to develop.
However, the size and location of the property render it unusable. The property owner
had approached them to discuss what would be possible here, such as freeway
signage. He explained that the proposal is to simply remove the overlay to revert the
zoning back to what it’s always been. The TOD overlay stops at the freeway, and all
transit-oriented developments should and have been developed to the west of this end
line. This property does not have the potential to have any type of transit-oriented
development on it. He then addressed staff’s recommended stipulations, pointing out
that a lot of the pedestrian-related improvements that would be required by the overlay
will now be required with this removal. As this site is not conducive to transit-oriented
development, these improvements would likely never have been built. With this
proposal, these improvements such as the sidewalks and landscaping will be built out.

Mr. Daniel Sharaby asked if the applicant has any exhibits showing what the site will
look like with the streetscape improvements. Mr. Lally replied that they do not, as they
only received the stipulations when the staff report was published about a week ago.

Ms. Ashley Nye explained that she understands why staff is recommending denial of
this case, but that the mitigating stipulations will result in a much better streetscape,
ultimately. Given this, she expressed her support for approving the project.

Mr. Tom O’Malley asked for confirmation that no vehicular access is possible on the
site, and that there really only is one use that would be viable on the site. Mr. Lally
confirmed that ADOT would not permit a new driveway so close to the freeway off-ramp,
and that the use envisioned for the site is a freeway sign. Mr. O’Malley asked Mr. Lally
to explain the history of the attempted sign permit on the site. Mr. Lally explained that
they had submitted an application for a variance and a use permit to allow an off-
premise sign with additional height on the site in 2017. The application underwent staff
review and was approved by the Zoning Adjustment Hearing Officer but, due to an
appeal and a subsequent Board of Adjustment hearing, further research was done and
the restriction on off-premise signage by the TOD overlay was uncovered.

Mr. Vic Grace asked if the sidewalk improvements will be equal to what exists on the
property to the west of the site, or if they will go above and beyond it. Mr. Lally replied
that, per staff’s recommended stipulations, the streetscape improvements will include a
wider sidewalk that will be detached, 75 percent tree shade, bollard lights, and a bicycle
repair facility – all of which exceed what exists along the property to the west.
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 250
PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Wally Graham stated that the applicant has owned this land since March 4, 1998,
when he purchased it from the State Department of Transportation. The deed from this
transaction outlines the access restriction due to the proximity to SR 143, so the
property owner was aware of this when purchasing the property, as well as the odd
shape of the property, which has not changed since then. In 2009, the property owner
tried to erect a building on the lot, which was denied. He stated that the proposal at
hand is to erect an 85-foot tall billboard and agreed with staff’s recommendation for
denial. Mr. Graham then addressed the TOD removal, stating the overlay was part of
the Reinvent Phx initiative, which aims to make areas of Phoenix more walkable and
was approved by this committee. He stated that this removal is unprecedented and that,
if approved, other property owners will want to do the same. He asked that the
committee deny this application.

Mr. Lally addressed Mr. Graham’s statement regarding no changes having occurred to
the property since the property owner purchased it. He stated that one major change
has occurred since then, which was the approval of the TOD overlay in 2009, which
immediately restricted what could be developed on the site. Further, the overlay
removal would only allow a maximum 70-foot-tall billboard, not 85 feet as Mr. Graham
stated, and any request to go above that would be required to go through the Zoning
Adjustment Hearing process. Additionally, at least three other overlay removal cases
have been processed recently, so this is not unprecedented.

Motion:
Mr. Tom O’Malley made a motion to approve the request. Mr. Daniel Sharaby
seconded the motion.

Vote: 16-1
Motion passes with committee members Swart, Abbott, Augusta, Bair, Thraen,
Crawford, Eichelkraut, Grace, McKee, Miller, Nye, O’Malley, Rush, Scher, Sharaby, and
Tribken in favor, and committee member Paceley opposed.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 251
Attachment D


REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
February 4, 2021

ITEM NO: 4
DISTRICT NO.: 8
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-TA-6-20-8 (Companion Case Z-13-20-8)
Location: Northwest corner of State Route 143 and Washington Street
Acreage: 1.75
Proposal: Amend Section 662.B. (Applicability) of the Zoning Ordinance to
replace Supplementary Zoning Map 1086 with a new map that
removes the property at the northwest corner of State Route 143
and Washington Street from the TOD-1 zoning overlay.
Applicant: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA
Owner: Werner L. Schlecht Trust
Representative: William E. Lally, Tiffany & Bosco, PA

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Denial.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Camelback East 1/5/2021 Approval. Vote: 16-1.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the Camelback East Village
Planning Committee recommendation.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Howard made a MOTION to approve Z-TA-6-20-8, per the
Camelback East Village Planning Committee recommendation.

Maker: Howard
Second: Gorraiz
Vote: 8-0
Absent: Johnson
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. Removal of the Overlay will provide some flexibility for the property
owner to pursue redevelopment options.

2. The underlying A-2 zoning district is not consistent with the General Plan Land
Use Map designation of Mixed Use; however, the site is under 10 acres.

3. The removal of the TOD-1 overlay is not conducive to a pedestrian-friendly




Page 252
environment, which should be the goal of new development along the light rail
corridor; therefore, mitigating stipulations have been recommended to require
a pedestrian-friendly environment.

Proposed Language:

Amend Section 662.B. (Applicability) to replace Supplementary Zoning Map 1086 with a
new map that removes the property at the northwest corner of State Route 143 and
Washington Street from the TOD-1 Zoning Overlay.

***

B. Applicability. The City of Phoenix’ Transit-Oriented Development Overlay
District (TOD-1) shall apply to lands delineated on the City’s Official
Supplementary Zoning Map 1086 as adopted on November 19, 2003, AND AS
AMENDED BY SUBSEQUENT ORDINANCES. All land uses and development
including, but not limited to buildings, drives, parking areas, landscaping,
streets, alleys, greenways, and pedestrian/bicycle ways designated to be
within this district, shall be located and developed in accordance with the
following provisions:

***

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Tamra Ingersoll at (602) 534-6648, TTY use 7-1-1.




Page 253



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Public Hearing and Ordinance Adoption - Amend City Code - Rezoning
Application Z-53-20-1 - Northeast Corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista Drive
(Ordinance G-6821)

Request to hold a public hearing on the request to amend the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix, by adopting Rezoning
Application Z-53-20-1 and rezone the site from S-1 (Ranch or Farm Residence District)
to R1-8 (Single-Family Residence District) for single-family residential use.

Summary
Current Zoning: S-1
Proposed Zoning: R1-8
Acreage: 15.52 acres
Proposed Use: Single-family residential

Owner: Funk Family Enterprises, LLC, et al
Applicant: Chuck Chisholm, K. Hovnanian Homes
Representative: Julie Vermillion, CVL Consultants, Inc.

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Deer Valley Village Planning Committee heard the case on Dec. 17,
2020 and recommended a continuance, by a vote of 5-3. The Deer Valley Village
Planning Committee heard the case again on Jan. 14, 2021 and recommended
approval, per the staff recommendation with the deletion of a stipulation, by a vote of
11-2.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard the case on Feb. 4 , 2021 and
recommended approval, per the Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
recommendation with an additional stipulation, by a vote of 7-0.
The Planning Commission recommendation was appealed and a petition for a 3/4 vote
was submitted on Feb. 11, 2021. A 3/4 vote is not required.

Location
On the northeast corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista Drive
Parcel Addresses: 27652 N. Black Canyon Highway
Council District: 1


Page 254


Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 255
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-53-20-1) FROM S-1 (FARM OR RANCH
RESIDENCE DISTRICT) TO R1-8 (SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE DISTRICT)

____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 15.52-acre site located on the northeast

corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista Drive in a portion of Section 35, Township 5

North, Range 2 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed

from “S-1” (Ranch or Farm Residence District) to “R1-8” (Single-Family Residence

District).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.

SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,




Page 256
violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. Lots within 33 feet of the north property line of the development shall be limited
to one story and 24 feet in height, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

2. The conceptual elevations shall be administratively approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer prior to single-family design review approval with specific
regard to the inclusion of the below elements. This review is for conceptual
purposes only. Specific development standards and requirements will be
determined by the Planning and Development Department.

a. Building materials and colors shall express a desert character and shall
blend with, rather than strongly contrast with the desert environment.

b. All elevations of the building shall contain three of the following
architectural embellishments and detailing: textural changes, pilasters,
offsets, recesses, variation in window size or location, overhang
canopies, or similar features.

c. Covered porches a minimum of 60 square feet in area at a depth of at
least six feet, courtyard areas with low surrounding walls a minimum of
60 square feet in area or homes with livable space a minimum of 3-feet
in front of the front line of the garage, shall be provided in the front
façades of a minimum of 50 percent of the elevations offered within the
subdivision.

d. Decorative garage treatments, including but not limited to, windows,
raised or recessed panels, architectural trim, and/or single garage doors.

3. All sidewalks adjacent to rights-of-way shall be detached with a minimum
five-foot-wide landscaped area located between the sidewalk and back of
curb and shall include minimum 2-inch caliper large canopy shade trees
planted a minimum of 20 feet on center or equivalent groupings, except
where utility and engineering constraints exist, and minimum 5-gallon
shrubs with a maximum mature height of 2 feet providing 75 percent live
cover, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

4. All landscape plant material shall comply with the approved plant species
list in Appendix A in the North Black Canyon Overlay District, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

5. A minimum of 20 percent of the gross project area shall be retained as open
space with a minimum of 5 percent improved as active/useable open space,
exclusive of landscape setbacks, washes and hillside preserve area, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.



Page 257
6. A minimum building setback of 114 feet for residential structures shall be
required along the eastern property line, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

7. Interior walls and privacy fencing, excluding walls located between lots, shall
be integral in color or painted to blend with the natural desert environment, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. Perimeter walls shall incorporate stone veneer, stonework, varying types of
CMU block, split face or faux stone, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

9. The developer shall coordinate with ADOT and provide a perpendicular
connection and associated right-of-way dedications at the intersection of
Pinnacle Vista Drive and the Interstate 17 frontage road, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

11. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

12. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. The developer shall record a Notice to Prospective Purchasers of Proximity to
Airport in order to disclose the existence and operational characteristics of
Phoenix Deer Valley Airport (DVT) to future owners or tenants of the property
as approved by the Aviation Department.

15. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a “No Hazard Determination” from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the FAA and a “NO
Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.



Page 258
16. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix Aviation Department for the site, per the content and form prescribed
by the City Attorney prior to final site plan approval.

17. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March 2021.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager



Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (2 Pages)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 259
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-53-20-1


The North half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast
quarter of Section 35, Township 5 North, Range 2 East of the Gila and Salt River Base
and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona;

EXCEPT all coal, gas and other minerals as reserved in Patent from the United States
of America.

PARCEL NO. 1 (205-01-002A)

The South half of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast
quarter of
Section 35, Township 5 North, Range 2 East of the Gila and Salt River Base and
Meridian, Maricopa
County, Arizona;

EXCEPT all coal, gas and other minerals as reserved in Patent from the United States
of America.

PARCEL NO. 2 (205-01-004A)

The South half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast
quarter of Section
35, Township 5 North, Range 2 East of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian,
Maricopa
County, Arizona;

EXCEPT any portion thereof lying within the right-of-way of Black Canyon Highway; and

EXCEPT all minerals as reserved in the Patent; and

EXCEPTING that portion conveyed to the State of Arizona.

PARCEL NO. 3 (205-01-008)

The North half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast
quarter of Section
35, Township 5 North, Range 2 East of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian,
Maricopa
County, Arizona;

EXCEPT any portion thereof lying within the right-of-way of Black Canyon Highway; and

EXCEPTING that portion conveyed to the State of Arizona in Docket 4493, Page 89;



Page 260
EXCEPT all coal, oil, gas, minerals and all uranium, thorium, or any other material
which is or may be determined to be peculiarly essential to the production of fissionable
materials, whether or not of commercial value, as reserved in Patent from United States
of America.




Page 261
Page 262
$WWDFKPHQW%




Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020

Deer Valley Village Planning Committee December 17, 2020
Hearing Date
Planning Commission Hearing Date January 7, 2020

Request From: S-1 (Farm or Ranch Residence) (15.52
acres)
Request To: R1-8 (Single-family Residence) (15.52
acres)
Proposed Use Single-Family Residential
Location Northeast corner of 31st Avenue and
Pinnacle Vista Drive
Applicant Chuck Chisholm-K. Hovnanian Homes
Representative Julie Vermillion-CVL Consultants
Owner Funk Family Enterprises, LLC
Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to stipulations

General Plan Conformity
General Plan Land Use Map
Residential 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre
Designation

31st Avenue Local 33-foot east half street

Street Map Pinnace Vista
Minor Collector 33-foot north half street
Classification Drive
Black Canyon
Existing Approximately 380 feet,
Highway Frontage
Freeway including frontage roads
Road

CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS CORE
VALUE; CERTAINTY AND CHARACTER; LAND USE PRINCIPLE: New
development and expansion or redevelopment of existing development in or near
residential areas should be compatible with existing uses and consistent with
adopted plans.

As stipulated, the proposed development will be compatible with the existing single-
family residential uses surrounding the site. The General Plan Land Use Map


Page 263
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


Designation for this area is 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of 4.08
dwelling units per acre is consistent with the General Plan designation. As stipulated,
the applicant has agreed to construct only single-story homes on the northern property
boundary to encourage compatibility with the surrounding area.

BUILD THE SUSTAINABLE URBAN CITY; TREES AND SHADE; DESIGN:
INTEGRATE TREES AND SHADE INTO THE DESIGN OF NEW DEVELOPMENT
AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THROUGHOUT PHOENIX.

The proposed development, as stipulated will provide detached sidewalks and trees to
encourage walkability along 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista Drive.

CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; OPPORTUNITY SITES; LAND
USE PRINCIPLE: Support reasonable levels of increased intensity, respectful of
local conditions and surrounding neighborhoods.

The proposed development offers an opportunity to develop an undeveloped property at
a scale that is compatible with the surrounding area. This is a unique area that was
primarily developed in Maricopa County with larger single-family residential lots. The
proposed development supports increased intensity in the area.

Area Plan / Policy / Principles
Reimagine Phoenix Initiative – See Background Item No. 6

Tree and Shade Master Plan – See Background Item No. 7

Complete Streets Guiding Principles – See Background Item No. 8

Housing Phoenix Plan – See background item No. 9

Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning
Land Use Zoning
Vacant/
On Site S-1
Undeveloped
Single-Family S-1
North
Residential/Vacant
Single-Family S-1
South
Residential/Vacant
East (across I- Multifamily PUD and R-3
17 Highway) Residential/Vacant
Vacant/ Single- S-1, approved R1-18, C-2 SP
West
Family Residential



Page 264
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


Background/Issues/Analysis
1. This is a request to rezone a
15.52-acre site located on the
northeast corner of 31st
Avenue and Pinnacle Vista
Drive from S-1 (Ranch or
Farm Residence) to R1-8
(Single-Family Residence
District) to allow for single-
family residential.




Zoning Aerial Map, Source: City of Phoenix Planning &
Development Department


2. The subject site has properties on three sides that are largely undeveloped and
zoned S-1. There are existing single-family homes to the north, west, and south
on large lots. The subject site is located to the west of the Interstate 17 (I-17)
Black Canyon Freeway. The R1-8 property to the southwest was rezoned in 1997
through Rezoning Case No. Z-49-97, which allowed increased density in the
area.

3. The General Plan Land
Use map designation for
the subject site is
Residential 2 to 5
dwelling units per acre.
The proposed rezoning
is consistent with the
General Plan Land Use
Map designation.

The following General
Plan Land Use Map
designations surrounding
the site are:

North: Residential 2 to 5
dwelling units per acre Source: City of Phoenix Planning & Development Department




Page 265
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


South: Residential 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre
East: (Across the N Black Canyon Freeway) Residential 5 to 15 dwelling units
per acre and Mixed Use (Residential 15 plus dwelling units per
acre/Commerce/Business Park).
West: Residential 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre.

The proposed site plan depicts a 61 lot subdivision. Lots are buffered from
existing single-family residential properties by Pinnacle Vista Drive on the south,
31st Avenue to the west and a 33-foot open space buffer on the north. An APS
easement buffers the subject site from Interstate 17 (I-17). To provide
compatibility with the existing large-lot residential to the north of the site, staff is
recommending a stipulation limiting the height of homes located along the
northern boundary to one-story and 24 feet in height. This is addressed n
Stipulation No. 1.

4. The developer has provided front-facing elevation types that illustrate variations in
roofline, window shapes and sizes, architectural embellishments and textural
changes. To ensure high quality design on all four-sides of the homes, staff is
recommending Stipulation No. 2 that requires PHO review to ensure specific
features be implemented.

5. The proposal includes a 61-lot subdivision with vehicular access to Pinnacle Vista
Drive and 31st Avenue. In order to provide compatibility with the scale of the
surrounding development the conceptual site plan includes several open space
areas. To ensure the site develops as presented, staff is recommending 20
percent of the gross project area be retained as open space. This is addressed in
Stipulation No. 5. The developer shall provide a 114 foot setback along the
eastern property line due to an APS utility easement in the area. This is
addressed in Stipulation No. 7. All interior walls shall blend with the desert
environment and exterior walls shall contain stone veneer, stonework or other
alternative design features to ensure a high-quality aesthetic in the area. These
are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 7 and 8. The site plan will be required to meet
the standards of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.

AREA PLANS, OVERLAY DISTRICTS, AND INITIATIVES
6. Reimagine Phoenix Initiative
As part of the Reimagine Phoenix initiative, the City of Phoenix is committed to
increasing the waste diversion rate to 40 percent by 2020 and to better manage
its solid waste resources. The City of Phoenix offers recycling collection for all
single-family residences. The provision of recycling containers was not addressed
in the applicant’s submittals; however, per City Code, the City provides recycling
containers and services to all single-family residences.

7. Tree and Shade Master Plan
The Tree and Shade Master Plan has a goal of treating the urban forest as
infrastructure to ensure that trees are an integral part of the city’s planning and


Page 266
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


development process. A vision in the master plan is to raise awareness by
leading by example. To accomplish the vision and goal of the policy document,
Stipulation No. 3 requires that the developer provide detached sidewalks adjacent
to rights-of-way and plant shade trees 20 feet on center or in equivalent
groupings along all street frontages. Planting trees adjacent to sidewalks provides
for the thermal comfort of pedestrians. All landscape plant material shall comply
with Appendix A in the North Black Canyon Overlay District. This is addressed n
Stipulation No. 4.

8. Complete Streets Guiding Principles
The Guiding Principles for Complete Streets encourage a more walkable
environment. It is recommended that sidewalks adjacent to rights-of way be
detached from the curb and a landscape strip planted between the curb and the
sidewalk. Trees planted on the west side of the sidewalk will provide shade from
the western sun. The combined landscaping with trees, detached sidewalk and
landscape strip, are consistent with a complete streets’ environment. These
provisions are addressed in Stipulation No. 3.

9. Housing Phoenix Plan
In June 2020, the Phoenix City Council approved the Housing Phoenix Plan. This
Plan contains policy initiatives for the development and preservation of housing
with vision of creating a stronger and more vibrant Phoenix through increased
housing options for residents at all income levels and family sizes. Phoenix’s
rapid population growth and housing underproduction has led to a need for over
163,000 new housing units. Current shortages of housing supply relative to
demand are a primary reason why housing costs are increasing.
The proposed development supports the Plan’s goal of preserving or creating
50,000 housing units by 2030 by contributing to a variety housing types that will
address the supply shortage at a more rapid pace while using vacant land in a
more sustainable fashion.

COMMUNITY INPUT SUMMARY
10. At the time the staff report was written one letter of opposition from surrounding
residents have been received by staff. Concerns include increased density,
character of area changing, traffic impacts and height.

11. The applicant has held several neighborhood meetings with adjacent residents.
As part of the citizen outreach, the applicant has agreed to limit homes to single-
story, with a maximum of 24-feet in height along the northern perimeter of the
development. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 1.




Page 267
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
12. The Street Transportation Department has indicated that the developer shall
dedicate the existing 33-foot Federal Patent Easement in the north side of the
development to ensure the abutting single-family property maintains legal access.
Furthermore, the Streets Transportation Department is requiring the developer to
coordinate with ADOT and provide connections and dedicate rights-of-way at the
intersection of Pinnacle Vista Drive and the I-17 frontage road. Additionally, all
streets within and adjacent to the development, shall be constructed with all
mandatory elements. All improvements shall meet ADA requirements. These are
addressed in Stipulation Nos. 9, 10 and 11.

13. The City of Phoenix Floodplain Management division of the Street Transportation
Department has determined that this parcel is not in a Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA), but is located in a Shaded Zone X, on panel 1260 L and 1280 L of the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) dated July 20, 2018 and January 29, 2015,
also protected by a levy.

14. The City of Phoenix Water Services Department has noted the site has existing
water and sewer mains that can potentially serve the proposed development,
however there is potential need to up size existing water and sewer infrastructure
mains so that any remodels or new buildings will be able to meet domestic and
fire code requirements.

15. The Fire Department commented that no fire code issues are anticipated with this
case and the site and/or buildings shall comply with the Phoenix Fire Code.

16. The City of Phoenix Aviation Department has noted that the site is within the
Phoenix Deer Valley Airport (DVT) traffic pattern airspace, which requires an
airport disclosure, avigation easement dedication and a no hazard determination
be filed. These are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 15, 16 and 17.

OTHER
17. The site is located in a larger area identified as being archaeologically sensitive. If
further review by the City of Phoenix Archaeology Office determines the site and
immediate area to be archaeologically sensitive, and if no previous archaeological
projects have been conducted within this project area, it is recommended that
archaeological Phase I data testing of this area be conducted. Phase II
archaeological data recovery excavations may be necessary based upon the
results of the testing. A qualified archaeologist must make this determination in
consultation with the City of Phoenix Archaeologist. In the event archaeological
materials are encountered during construction, all ground disturbing activities
must cease within a 33-foot radius of the discovery and the City of Phoenix
Archaeology Office must be notified immediately and allowed time to properly
assess the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation Nos. 12, 13 and 14.

18. Development and use of the site is subject to all applicable codes and
ordinances. Zoning approval does not negate other ordinance requirements.

Page 268
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


Other formal actions such as, but not limited to, zoning adjustments and
abandonments, may be required.

Findings

1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of
Residential 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre.

2. As stipulated, the proposed development is compatible with the existing land use
pattern in the area and is designed to enhance a walkable environment along
Pinnacle Vista Drive and 31st Avenue where there are other single-family
developments nearby.

3. As stipulated, the proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses because
of the limited density, limited height, and increased buffers.

Stipulations

 %XLOGLQJV within 33 feet of the north property line of the development shall be
limited toone story and 24 feet in height, as approved by the Planning and
DevelopmentDepartment.

 The conceptual elevations shall be administratively approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer prior to single-family design review approval with specific regard
to the inclusion of the below elements. This review is for conceptual purposes
only. Specific development standards and requirements will be determined by the
Planning and Development Department.

D Building materials and colors shall express a desert character and shall
blend with, rather than strongly contrast with the desert environment.

E All elevations of the building shall contain three of the following
architectural embellishments and detailing: textural changes, pilasters,
offsets, recesses, variation in window size or location, overhang canopies,
or similar features.

F Covered porches a minimum of 60 square feet in area at a depth of atleast
six feet, courtyard areas with low surrounding walls a minimum of 60
square feet in area or homes with livable space a minimum of 3-feet infront
of the front line of the garage, shall be provided in the front façades ofa
minimum of 50 percent of the elevations offered within the subdivision.

G Decorative garage treatments, including but not limited to, windows, raised
or recessed panels, architectural trim, and/or single garage doors.




Page 269
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


3. All sidewalks adjacent to rights-of-way shall be detached with a minimum five-
foot-wide landscaped area located between the sidewalk and back of curb
and shall include minimum 2-inch caliper large canopy shade trees planted a
minimum of 20 feet on center or equivalent groupings, except where utility
and engineering constraints exist, and minimum 5-gallon shrubs with a
maximum mature height of 2 feet providing 75 percent live cover, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

4. All landscape plant material shall comply with the approved plant species list
in Appendix A in the North Black Canyon Overlay District, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.

5. A minimum of 20 percent of the gross project area shall be retained as open
space with a minimum of 5 percent improved as active/useable open space,
exclusive of landscape setbacks, washes and hillside preserve area, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

6. A minimum building setback of 114 feet for residential structures shall be required
along the eastern property line, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

7. Interior walls and privacy fencing, excluding walls located between lots, shall be
integral in color or painted to blend with the natural desert environment, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. Perimeter walls shall incorporate stone veneer, stonework, varying types of CMU
block, split face or faux stone, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

9. The developer shall dedicate the existing 33-foot Federal Patent Easement on
the north side of the development and construct the south half of the McArthur
Road alignment per the local street standard with a minimum of 20 feet of asphalt
paving, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall coordinate with ADOT and provide a perpendicular connection
and associated right-of-way dedications at the intersection of Pinnacle Vista Drive
and the Interstate 17 frontage road, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

11. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development
with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands,
landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by the Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.




Page 270
Staff Report: Z-53-20-1
December 2, 2020


12. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

13. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the Phase
I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified archaeologist,
determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the applicant shall
conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

14. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33- foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

15. The developer shall record a Notice to Prospective Purchasers of Proximity to
Airport in order to disclose the existence and operational characteristics of Phoenix
Deer Valley Airport (DVT) to future owners or tenants of the property as approved
by the Aviation Department.

16. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a “No Hazard Determination” from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the FAA and a “NO
Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

17. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix Aviation Department for the site, per the content and form prescribed by
the City Attorney prior to final site plan approval.


Writer
David Simmons
December 2, 2020

Team Leader
Samantha Keating

Exhibits
Sketch Map
Aerial
Site Plan date stampedOctober 2, 2020 SDJH 
Elevations date stamped October 2, 2020 SDJHV
&RPPXQLW\&RUUHVSRQGHQFH SDJHV 




Page 271
AVE
S-1 PCD


30TH LN 30TH
Z-109-97

R1-6* S-1
Z-25-97
CP/GCP *
Z-133-05

OBERLIN WAY


R-3*
Z-9-99
Z-SP-59-96
S-1 §
¦
¨
31ST AVE
17 Z-45-18



33RD AVE




PUD *
Z-11-14
PINNAC LE VISTA DR
C-2 SP *
Z-SP-28-08
BUCKHORN TRL Z-105-08

29TH AVE
BLAC K
R1-18
Z-41-02


C AN Y
QUAIL TRACK DR

R1-8* ON H W
32ND LN 31ST DR Y
Z-49-97
S-1 SP
Z-SP-27-92
BAJADA DR
S-1

REDBIRD RD




I
Miles
JOMAX RD

HAPPY VALLEY RD
Z-53-20

PINNACLE PEAK RD
0.09 0.045 0 0.09
DEER VALLEY DR
DEER VALLEY VILLAGE SR 101
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 UNION HILLS DR

BELL RD

7TH ST
16TH ST
7TH AVE
GREENWAY RD


19TH AVE
I - 17
35TH AVE
51ST AVE 43RD AVE


APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
Chuck Chisholm - K. Hovnanian Homes
FROM:
S-1 ( 15.52 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO. DATE:
10/08/2020
Z-53-20 REVISION DATES:



GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
15.52 Acres QS 50-22 P-7 TO: R1-8 ( 15.52 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
S-1 15 N/A
R1-8 66 85

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-53-20.mxd
Page 272
AVE
S-1 PCD


30TH LN 30TH
Z-109-97

R1-6* S-1
Z-25-97
CP/GCP *
Z-133-05

OBERLIN WAY


R-3*
Z-9-99
Z-SP-59-96
S-1 §
¨
¦
31ST AVE
17 Z-45-18



33RD AVE




PUD *
Z-11-14
PINNAC LE VISTA DR
C-2 SP *
Z-SP-28-08
BUCKHORN TRL Z-105-08

29TH AVE
BLAC K
R1-18
Z-41-02


C AN Y
QUAIL TRACK DR

R1-8* ON H W
32ND LN 31ST DR Y
Z-49-97
S-1 SP
Z-SP-27-92
BAJADA DR
S-1

REDBIRD RD Maricopa County Assessor's Office




I
Miles
JOMAX RD

HAPPY VALLEY RD
Z-53-20

PINNACLE PEAK RD
0.09 0.045 0 0.09
DEER VALLEY DR
DEER VALLEY VILLAGE SR 101
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 UNION HILLS DR

BELL RD

7TH ST
16TH ST
7TH AVE
GREENWAY RD


19TH AVE
I - 17
35TH AVE
51ST AVE 43RD AVE


APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
Chuck Chisholm - K. Hovnanian Homes
FROM:
S-1 ( 15.52 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO. DATE:
10/08/2020
Z-53-20 REVISION DATES:



GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
15.52 Acres QS 50-22 P-7 TO: R1-8 ( 15.52 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
S-1 15 N/A
R1-8 66 85

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-53-20.mxd
Page 273
Sterling Vista
Site Plan
10’ MIN.; 15’ AVERAGE LOTS 1-16 RESTRICTED
LANDSCAPE SETBACK TO SINGLE STORY STERLING VISTA
33’ OPEN SPACE BUFFER Existing Zoning S-1
Proposed Zoning R1-8 PRD
~114’
205-01-006A, 205-01-002A,
APN #s
205-01-008, 205-01-004A
Gross Area 14.95 ac
Lot Size 45' X 108'
Yield 61
Density 4.08 du/ac
Landscape Tract 2.56 ac 17%
Electrial Easement 1.79 ac 12%
Total Tract Area 4.35 ac 29%
Total Centerline Length 3663.5 lf

ASE

APS E
Page 274 PH
I-17 (
MENT


X-CO
~131’
OENI



RDES



J C T. )
PERIMETER STREET 10’ MIN.; 15’ AVERAGE
0’ 50’ 100’
SETBACK: 15’ LANDSCAPE SETBACK



30 September 2020
N:\01\0354401\Graphics\Exhibits\site plan.indd
6(5,(6:,'7+

$XJXVW




+286,1*352'8&7:,'7+  
*$5$*('225:,'7+  
*$5$*('22572)$&$'(5$7,2 




Page 275




3/$1 3/$1 3/$1 3/$1
&5$)760$1 63$1,6+ ,7$/,$1$7( &5$)760$1
6) 6) 6) 6)
6725< 6725< 6725< 6725<




675((76&(1( 67(5/,1*9,67$
$='3+2(1,;$5,=21$ 3

6(5,(6:,'7+

$XJXVW

/,96) 
3/$1:,'7+ 
3/$1 
63$1,6+




 




63$1,6+
)52179,(:176




522)3/$1
6&$/(176

67
3520,1(17*$%/(6
Page 276

&21&5(7( 6 7,/(6

5$.(6$1'($9(6
5,*+7(/(9$7,21 5($5(/(9$7,21 '(&25$7,9(*$%/('(7$,/6
6&$/(   6&$/(  
'(&25$7,9(6+877(56

522)3,7&+




725,'*(
&2/256&+(0(%




 




/()7(/(9$7,21 )5217(/(9$7,21
6&$/(   6&$/(   67(5/,1*9,67$
$='3+2(1,;$5,=21$ 5

12/1/2020


Mr. Simmons,
I am writing this to voice my opposition to the proposed zoning change, Case # Z-53-20-1. The
proposed development of 61 homes will have a significant impact on traffic in the area and is not
compatible with the surrounding area.

The traffic study presented by the developer is faulty and has no basis for the assumptions made. The
study fails to address the already re-zoned properties that are/will be developed and will increase traffic
load on the limited egress routes into/out of the area. More importantly, the assumption that only 10-
percent of the trips made from and 30-percent of the trip to the proposed development will use 33 rd
Avenue is completely baseless. Consider the following:
x Shopping, including grocery/convenience/Starbucks/etc., are on Happy Valley Road and will be
accessed via 33rd Ave
x Local Schools are most easily accessed via 33rd ave to Happy Valley
x Local gas stations are on Happy Valley Road and will be accessed via 33 rd Ave
x The shortest driving route to the development from northbound I-17 will be via Happy Valley.
Mapping apps on cell phones/computers are going to direct drivers to use this route.

Anyone with an understanding of how people go about their daily activities should understand that the
33rd Avenue route will be uses significantly more than what is assumed. An “engineered”, and I use that
term loosely, document should not take place over a common sense understanding of the situation.

The house density is excessive considering the rural character of the area. Yes, there are some portions
of developments in the general area that have similar density, but they are not in the immediate area of
the proposed development. These, higher density developments already do not fit into the rural
character of the area. There are a sufficient number of these to provide adequate diversity in the
neighborhood. We don’t need another one and the additional traffic/people/crime potential that
comes with it.

The developer has stated that the houses on the northern part of the project would be restricted to
single story, indicating that there are plans for two story units elsewhere. With four-plus houses per
acre and two-story units, this development would give a “being in a canyon feeling” when traveling
down streets. This would not be compatible with the surrounding properties or the rural nature of the
area.

If rezoning is to occur, a maximum density of 3.0 houses/acre should be stipulated. That would ensure
the development was compatible with the area and would reduce the negative effect of traffic on the
established residents. Please see Figure 1 (next page) for visual representation of egress route
limitations and rezoned properties that will increase traffic load in area.




Page 277
12/1/2020


Figure 1




Please review my correspondence and add it to the file related to the proposed zoning change and
associated development. Thank You,

Kenneth A. Vest, 27635 N 37th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85083




Page 278
Attachment C




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-53-20-1

Date of VPC Meeting December 17, 2020
Request From S-1 (15.52 acres)
Request To R1-8 (15.52 acres)
Proposed Use Single-family Residential
Location Northeast corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista
Drive
VPC Recommendation Continuance
VPC Vote 5-3


VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Mr. David Simmons, staff, went over the request with the committee. He
covered the existing General Plan Land Use designation on the site and
surrounding area, the uses in the surrounding area, the height limitations
stipulated as well as enhanced buffers abutting existing large lot residential uses.
He also went over stipulation rationale with the committee.

Mr. Tom Galvin, Rose Law Group, explained that the intent of the request. He
went over concessions made from the time of the initial neighborhood meeting,
which includes the following:
• Decreased total # of lots from 61 to 57
• Decreased overall density from 4.08 to 3.8 du/ac (GP allows 2-5 du/ac)
• Increased lot sizes from 45’ wide to 50’ wide
• Increased open space to 30%
• Removed access on 31st Avenue
• Relocated Pinnacle Vista access closer to Frontage Rd / away from
neighbors.
• All lots along 31st Avenue will be restricted to single story.
• Detached sidewalk AND 10’ equestrian trail provided along 31st Avenue.
• Constructing new 6’ block wall to buffer adjacent property owners to the
north (Enna and Doles)
He went over the site challenges as well as the General Plan Land Use Map
conformity. He continues to request the committee consider recommending the
deletion of Stipulation No. 9.

Mr. Keith Greenberg shared that the HOA can enact CC&R’s that can restrict
weekend rentals. He asked if this was planned for this community.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 279
Z-53-20-1

Mr. Galvin shared that this provision will be included int eh CC&R’s.

Mr. Ricardo Romero shared that traffic may be of concerns here due to access
to the area being limited. He asked the applicant how they addressed these
challenges.

Mr. Chris Williams, Traffic engineer with Y2k Engineering, shared that the traffic
study revealed that this is the lowest possible traffic generator on the scale. He
shared that he and the development team worked with ADOT to gain access to
the I-17 frontage road to help alleviate traffic on the main ingress/egress point
into the area. ADOT allowed two points of ingress/egress out of the subdivision
onto the frontage road. This helped to reduce trips in the study on 31st Avenue.

Vice Chair Trilese DiLeo asked if there were tow access points approved onto
the frontage road.

Mr. Williams reiterated that there are two access pints proposed onto the
frontage road.

Public Comment:

Mr. Roy Weinberg, residing at 3132 W. Buckhorn Trail, shared that he is
opposed to the project due to increased density, character of the area changing,
and increased traffic volumes. He shared that the proposed horse trail is like
throwing a biscuit to a dog. It doesn’t achieve anything for the area as existing
equestrian residence ride their horses on the streets.

Ms. Cheryl Colin shared that she thinks the technology is too challenging for
public hearings. She also shared concerns with the character of the area
changing and traffic increase concerns.
Mr. Dan Vanna, residing at 27605 N. 31st Avenue, Has infrastructure concerns,
traffic volume concerns, and emergency service access concerns due to an
increase in density.

Mr. Rodney Muehlfeld, residing at 3205 W. Wahalla Dr, shared concerns about
traffic increases, density proposed is too high, the equestrian lane is ridiculous
and shared that this perceived amenity provides no bonus points.

Applicants Response:

Mr. Tom Galvin Explained that the S-1 zoning designation really does not make
since at this location. There is an R1-6 subdivision to the north and an R1-8
subdivision to the southwest of the site. He explained that this proposal would be
a great transition area between the I-17 and the more rural residential lots further
to the west.

Mr. Chris Williams, traffic engineer, shared that a 58 lot single-family
subdivision is not going to create traffic issues as this is a low volume traffic
generator, comparatively. He explained that gaining access by looping around

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 280
Z-53-20-1

the I-17 frontage road takes the same amount of time as someone traveling up
31st Avenue.

VPC Discussion:

Mr. Russell Osborne shared that he is opposed to the project and believes this
area should remain S-1.

MOTION: Mr. Russell Osborne motioned to recommend denial for Rezoning
Case No. Z-53-20-1. Committee member Mr. Ozzie Virgil seconded the motion.

VOTE: 3-4, motion to recommend denial failed, with Committee Members
Greenberg, Levy and Osborn in favor. Committee members Gardner
Kenney, Romero, and Vice Chair DiLeo not in favor.

Mr. Ozzie Virgil made himself known as a call-in member at 7:30, bringing
quorum to 8.

Mr. Russell Osborne stated that this committee was created to be a safeguard
for residences. We can’t ignore that. This is an existing rural community and the
people living there bought in this way.

MOTION: Mr. Matthew Kenney motioned to recommend approval with eh
deletion of Stipulation No. 9 for Rezoning Case No. Z-53-20-1. Committee
member Ms. Michelle Gardner seconded the motion.

VOTE: 4-4, motion to recommend approval with the deletion of Stipulation
No. 9 failed, with Committee Members Gardner, Kenney, Romero and DiLeo
in favor. Committee members Greenberg, Levy, Osborne, and Virgil not in
favor.

Vice Chair Trilese DiLeo went over land rights and the need for additional
housing in the current market. She stated that the committee must look at all
angles prior to making a decision on cases heard before the committee.

Ms. Michelle Gardner expressed her support for the proposal stating that the
developer worked with the neighbors over a extensive amount of time and offered
many substantial concessions to ensure concerns were addressed. She
applauded the applicant for their community outreach work and explained that
growth in this area is inevitable. Something will be developed here. She went on
to say that the traffic study was done by a reputable traffic engineering firm and
the results are clear. An increase in traffic is a non-issue, especially considering
the ADOT access agreements onto the frontage road. She reiterated her support
for the project.

Mr. Russell Osborn stated that the State Land department is selling land. There
is plenty of land available elsewhere where housing can be built. The existing
residence should be able to keep their rural lifestyle in this area and we should
listen to their concerns.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 281
Z-53-20-1


Mr. Ricardo Romero stated that home prices are currently out of control. We
need more inventory to drive these inflated prices down. People are being priced
out of the market. The lack of inventory is causing issues for prospective home
buyers.

Vice Cahir DiLeo asked the committee what they would like to see developed on
this site.

Mr. Russell Osborne said that this question is out of line and outside of the
committee’s purview. He went on too state that the committee should not be
making determinations on what should be located on private land.

Mr. David Simmons, staff, shared that Vice Chair DiLeo’ s inquiry was perfectly
acceptable.

Ms. Michelle Gardner also stated that Vice Chair DiLeo’s questions was
perfectly valid for this committee and asked what the committee would like to see
developed here. She asked if the committee thinks it should remain vacant land,
farm or ranch residential or a subdivision like the one presented to the committee
tonight.

Mr. Simmons shared that the applicant is requesting a continuance to the
January 14, 2021 Deer Valley Village Planning Committee meeting to a lot the
development team time to work further with the neighbors.

MOTION: Mr. Keith Greenberg made a motion to continue Rezoning Case No.
Z-53-20-1 to the January 14, 20201 Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
meeting agenda. Committee member Mr. Matthew Kenney seconded the
motion.

VOTE: 5-3, motion to continue passed, with Committee Members Gardner,
Greenberg, Kenney, Levy and DiLeo in favor. Committee members
Osborne, Romero and Virgil not in favor.

Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation & Stipulations:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 282
Attachment D




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-53-20-1

Date of VPC Meeting January 14, 2021
Request From S-1 (15.52 acres)
Request To R1-8 (15.52 acres)
Proposed Use Single-family Residential
Location Northeast corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista
Drive
VPC Recommendation Approval, per staff recommendation and deletion of
Stipulation No. 9
VPC Vote 11-2


VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Mr. David Simmons, staff, went over the request with the committee. He
covered the existing General Plan Land Use designation on the site and
surrounding area, the uses in the surrounding area, the height limitations
stipulated as well as enhanced buffers abutting existing large lot residential uses.
He also went over stipulation rationale with the committee.

Mr. Tom Galvin, with Rose Law Group, representing the applicant, explained
that the intent of the request. He went over concessions made from the time of
the initial neighborhood meeting, which includes the following:
• Decreased total # of lots from 61 to 57
• Decreased overall density from 4.08 to 3.8 du/ac (GP allows 2-5 du/ac)
• Increased lot sizes from 45’ wide to 50’ wide
• Increased open space to 30%
• Removed access on 31st Avenue
• Relocated Pinnacle Vista access closer to Frontage Rd / away from
neighbors.
• All lots along 31st Avenue will be restricted to single story.
• Detached sidewalk AND 10’ equestrian trail provided along 31st Avenue.
• Constructing new 6’ block wall to buffer adjacent property owners to the
north (Enna and Doles)
• Restricting rentals through cc & r’s.
He went over the site challenges as well as the General Plan Land Use Map
conformity. He went over the site layout changes made to date as a result of
public comment and concerns. He continued and requested the committee
consider the deletion of Stipulation No. 9.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 283
Z-53-20-1

Chairman Joseph Grossman stated that he feels the presentation did not touch
on the restrictions in place under the transmission corridor.

Mr. Galvin shared that the transmission corridor presents many challenges for
the site as no development can take place within the corridor, which is quite large
compared to the size of the overall site.

Vice Cahir Trilese DiLeo asked why short term rentals are becoming an issue.

Mr. Galvin stated this was a direct result of public comment.

Ms. Jennifer Hall, with Rose Law Group, shared that she conducted all public
outreach efforts for this case and confirmed that restricting rentals was a direct
result of public concerns.

Vice Chair DiLeo asked if there was a sidewalk proposed next to the equestrian
trail.

Ms. Hall shared that there is a detached sidewalk proposed along side the
equestrian path.

Mr. Russell Osborn asked if long term rentals would be allowed or if short term
rentals were only addressed through the cc & r’s.

Ms. Hall shared that both long and short term rentals are addressed and only 10
percent of the homes will be allowed to become rental properties.

Mr. Osborn asked if the APS transmission corridor would remain raw desert or
be landscaped and maintained by the HOA.

Mr. Doug Chubin, with Co & Van Loo, stated that the area will be landscaped
with decomposed granite and low level bushes as well as serve as stormwater
retention.

Mr. Ozzie Virgil asked what the actual lot sizes are after all of the changes
made.

Mr. Galvin shared that the lot sizes, for the most part, are 50 feet by 100 feet.

Mr. Virgil stated that 5000 square foot lots are very small. He asked what the
open space percentage ended up being.

Mr. Galvin shared that the minimum open space proposed is 30 percent.

Mr. Ricardo Romero shared that this comes out to 4 acres of open space.

Mr. Mark Lewis asked Mr. Galvin to explain why they are requesting the deletion
of Stipulation No. 9.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 284
Z-53-20-1

Ms. Hall shared that the development team went back and forth with staff on the
Stipulation No. 9 requirement. Staff stated that this is a State requirement as it is
a GLO easement. Ms. Hall stated that the roadway would most likely never be
improved on either side so this improvement would be a “road to nowhere”.

Mr. Osborne asked how many homeowners requested the deletion of Stipulation
No. 9.

Mr. Galvin shared that the discussion were between the neighbors abutting to
the north, which are two large lot single-family homes. They would like to see this
area act as a open space buffer and not an improved roadway. He agrees if the
roadway improvements were to occur, this would indeed be a road to nowhere.

Mr. Chris Williams, traffic engineer, stated that a full traffic study was not
required for this case because this is the lowest possible use for the site. It only
warranted a traffic statement because anticipated traffic volumes are so low.

Public Comment:

Mr. Andy Mills, residing at 27620 N. 31st Ave, provided a power point slide to
staff prior to the meeting. He went over circulation for the entire area along the
frontage roads and all future planned developments along the frontage roads
along I-17. He expressed concerns about the amount of traffic that will have to
utilize the frontage roads and highlighted concerns about the Dixileta Drive
overpass. He stated that this area will become very dangerous.

Mr. Mark Lewis stated that he appreciates the time, work and detail Mr. Mills put
unto his graphic. He shared that a massive development was recently approved
just north of the 303 highway. The expansion and growth in this are will require
new housing options in the area.

Mr. Mills stated that there are plenty of other areas in which this proposal could
be located in the surrounding area.

Mr. Russell Osborn asked if the traffic study included the frontage road.

Mr. Chris Williams, traffic engineer, shared that each new project is required to
do a traffic study.

Mr. Dennis Rodriquez, residing at 3114 W. Spur Dr., asked the committee to
reconsider a recommendation for approval and expressed concerns with
increased traffic and the character of the area changing from rural to a more
urban environment.

Mr. Roy Weinberg, residing at 3132 W. Buckhorn Trail, asked the committee if
they read his letter of opposition sent out by staff. He reiterated his concerns
about traffic and the character of the area changing.



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 285
Z-53-20-1

Chairman Joseph Grossman shared that the committee did receive all
neighborhood correspondence and all letters were reviewed prior to the meeting.
He shared that there are protocols in place to ensure community input is
reviewed and considered.

Mr. Rodney Muehlfeld, residing at 3205 W. Bajada Dr, has concerns about the
character of the area changing, traffic and the proposed density being to high.

Mr. Randy Schille, residing at 3125 W. Dynamite Blvd, stated that he thinks the
development team has gone above and beyond with their negotiations with the
concerned neighbors. He shared that he in in support due to the number of
concessions made by the developer.

Mr. Ozzie Virgil shared that he would put less people under powerlines, not
more.

Mr. Ricardo Romero asked Mr. Schmille where in relation to the project he lives.

Mr. Schmille stated that he lives two blocks away.

Ms. Cheryl Colin, residing at 3031 W Oberlin Way, asked how we are to know
how many of the neighbors were notified about this proposal. He shared
concerns with traffic, overcrowding in the neighborhood, density and the
character of the area changing.

Mr. Virgil asked Ms. Colin what density would be acceptable to her on this site.

Ms. Colin stated that she believes 2 dwelling units per acre would be
acceptable.

Mr. Virgil asked Ms. Colin if she knew how many of her neighbors were notified.

Ms. Colin stated that she did not know.

Mr. Don Enna, residing at 27605 N. 31st Ave, shared that he has lived in this
area for over 50 years. He gave Ms. Hall and Mr. Osborn kudos for their efforts
to understand neighbors’ concerns. He stated that this proposal is just another
dog and pony show and has concerns about traffic.

Applicants Response:

Mr. Chris Williams, traffic engineer, stated that traffic will not be of concern as it
relates to this project because this is the lowest traffic generator there is. We
shared that they were able to achieve two access points onto the frontage road
from ADOT, which will alleviate traffic in and around the existing neighborhoods.

Mr. Thomas Galvin shared that they have met all notification requirements and
have made significant alternations to the original proposal as a result of public
comment.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 286
Z-53-20-1


MOTION: Vice Chair Trilese DiLeo motioned to recommend approval per staff’s
recommendation and the deletion of Stipulation No. 9 for Rezoning Case No. Z-
58-20-1. Committee member Mr. Ricardo Romero seconded the motion.

VOTE: 11-2, motion to recommend approval passed, with Committee
Members Grossman, DiLeo, Davenport, Fergis, Gardner, Greenburg,
Kenney, Levy, Lewis, Romero, and Shipman in favor. Committee Members
Osborne and Virgil opposed.

Stipulations:

1. Lots within 33 feet of the north property line of the development shall be limited to
one story and 24 feet in height, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

2. The conceptual elevations shall be administratively approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer prior to single-family design review approval with specific regard
to the inclusion of the below elements. This review is for conceptual purposes
only. Specific development standards and requirements will be determined by the
Planning and Development Department.

a. Building materials and colors shall express a desert character and shall
blend with, rather than strongly contrast with the desert environment.

b. All elevations of the building shall contain three of the following
architectural embellishments and detailing: textural changes, pilasters,
offsets, recesses, variation in window size or location, overhang canopies,
or similar features.

c. Covered porches a minimum of 60 square feet in area at a depth of at
least six feet, courtyard areas with low surrounding walls a minimum of 60
square feet in area or homes with livable space a minimum of 3-feet in
front of the front line of the garage, shall be provided in the front façades of
a minimum of 50 percent of the elevations offered within the subdivision.

d. Decorative garage treatments, including but not limited to, windows, raised
or recessed panels, architectural trim, and/or single garage doors.

3. All sidewalks adjacent to rights-of-way shall be detached with a minimum five-
foot-wide landscaped area located between the sidewalk and back of curb
and shall include minimum 2-inch caliper large canopy shade trees planted a
minimum of 20 feet on center or equivalent groupings, except where utility
and engineering constraints exist, and minimum 5-gallon shrubs with a
maximum mature height of 2 feet providing 75 percent live cover, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

4. All landscape plant material shall comply with the approved plant species list
in Appendix A in the North Black Canyon Overlay District, as approved by

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 287
Z-53-20-1

the Planning and Development Department.

5. A minimum of 20 percent of the gross project area shall be retained as open
space with a minimum of 5 percent improved as active/useable open space,
exclusive of landscape setbacks, washes and hillside preserve area, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

6. A minimum building setback of 114 feet for residential structures shall be required
along the eastern property line, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

7. Interior walls and privacy fencing, excluding walls located between lots, shall be
integral in color or painted to blend with the natural desert environment, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. Perimeter walls shall incorporate stone veneer, stonework, varying types of CMU
block, split face or faux stone, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

9. The developer shall dedicate the existing 33-foot Federal Patent Easement on
the north side of the development and construct the south half of the McArthur
Road alignment per the local street standard with a minimum of 20 feet of asphalt
paving, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall coordinate with ADOT and provide a perpendicular
connection and associated right-of-way dedications at the intersection of Pinnacle
Vista Drive and the Interstate 17 frontage road, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

11. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development
with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands,
landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by the Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.

12. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

13. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

14. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33- foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 288
Z-53-20-1


15. The developer shall record a Notice to Prospective Purchasers of Proximity to
Airport in order to disclose the existence and operational characteristics of
Phoenix Deer Valley Airport (DVT) to future owners or tenants of the property as
approved by the Aviation Department.

16. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a “No Hazard Determination” from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the FAA and a “NO
Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

17. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix Aviation Department for the site, per the content and form prescribed by
the City Attorney prior to final site plan approval.



Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation & Stipulations:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 289
Attachment E



REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
February 4, 2021

ITEM NO: 15
DISTRICT NO.: 1
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-53-20-1
Location: Northeast corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista Drive
From: S-1
To: R1-8
Acreage: 15.52
Proposal: Single-family residential
Applicant: Chuck Chisholm, K. Hovnanian Homes
Owner: Funk Family Enterprises, LLC
Representative: Julie Vermillion, CVL Consultants, Inc

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Deer Valley 12/17/2020 Continued. Vote: 5-3.
Deer Valley 1/14/2021 Approval, per the staff recommendation with a deleted
stipulation. Vote: 11-2.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the Deer Valley Village Planning
Committee recommendation, with an additional stipulation.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Mangum made a MOTION to approve Z-53-20-1, per the
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee recommendation, with an additional stipulation
as read into the record.

Maker: Mangum
Second: McCabe
Vote: 7-0-1
Absent: Johnson (Conflict: Shank)
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of
Residential 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre.

2. As stipulated, the proposed development is compatible with the existing land
use pattern in the area and is designed to enhance a walkable environment




Page 290
along Pinnacle Vista Drive and 31st Avenue where there are other single-
family developments nearby.

3. As stipulated, the proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses
because of the limited density, limited height, and increased buffers.

Stipulations:

1. Lots within 33 feet of the north property line of the development shall be limited
to one story and 24 feet in height, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

2. The conceptual elevations shall be administratively approved by the Planning
Hearing Officer prior to single-family design review approval with specific
regard to the inclusion of the below elements. This review is for conceptual
purposes only. Specific development standards and requirements will be
determined by the Planning and Development Department.

a. Building materials and colors shall express a desert character and shall
blend with, rather than strongly contrast with the desert environment.

b. All elevations of the building shall contain three of the following
architectural embellishments and detailing: textural changes, pilasters,
offsets, recesses, variation in window size or location, overhang
canopies, or similar features.

c. Covered porches a minimum of 60 square feet in area at a depth of at
least six feet, courtyard areas with low surrounding walls a minimum of
60 square feet in area or homes with livable space a minimum of 3-feet
in front of the front line of the garage, shall be provided in the front
façades of a minimum of 50 percent of the elevations offered within the
subdivision.

d. Decorative garage treatments, including but not limited to, windows,
raised or recessed panels, architectural trim, and/or single garage
doors.

3. All sidewalks adjacent to rights-of-way shall be detached with a minimum
five-foot-wide landscaped area located between the sidewalk and back of
curb and shall include minimum 2-inch caliper large canopy shade trees
planted a minimum of 20 feet on center or equivalent groupings, except
where utility and engineering constraints exist, and minimum 5-gallon
shrubs with a maximum mature height of 2 feet providing 75 percent live
cover, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

4. All landscape plant material shall comply with the approved plant species
list in Appendix A in the North Black Canyon Overlay District, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.




Page 291
5. A minimum of 20 percent of the gross project area shall be retained as open
space with a minimum of 5 percent improved as active/useable open space,
exclusive of landscape setbacks, washes and hillside preserve area, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. A minimum building setback of 114 feet for residential structures shall be
required along the eastern property line, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

7. Interior walls and privacy fencing, excluding walls located between lots, shall
be integral in color or painted to blend with the natural desert environment, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. Perimeter walls shall incorporate stone veneer, stonework, varying types of
CMU block, split face or faux stone, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

9. The developer shall dedicate the existing 33-foot Federal Patent Easement on
the north side of the development and construct the south half of the McArthur
Road alignment per the local street standard with a minimum of 20 feet of
asphalt paving, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

10. The developer shall coordinate with ADOT and provide a perpendicular
connection and associated right-of-way dedications at the intersection of
Pinnacle Vista Drive and the Interstate 17 frontage road, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

11. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

12. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

13. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

14. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

15. The developer shall record a Notice to Prospective Purchasers of Proximity to
Airport in order to disclose the existence and operational characteristics of




Page 292
Phoenix Deer Valley Airport (DVT) to future owners or tenants of the property
as approved by the Aviation Department.

16. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a “No Hazard Determination” from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the FAA and a “NO
Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

17. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix Aviation Department for the site, per the content and form prescribed
by the City Attorney prior to final site plan approval.

18. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER
SHALL EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE
WAIVER SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE INCLUDED
IN THE REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Tamra Ingersoll at (602) 534-6648, TTY use 7-1-1.




Page 293
Attachment F
204-23-448
204-23-449204-23-452
205-02-028B 205-02-028A 204-23-451 204-23-445 204-23-44 7 204-23-450
204-23-44 6
OBERLIN WAY




205-01-01 3H 205-01-01 3E 205- 01-003D
205-02-007B 205-02-00 7A 205-01-01 3B 205-01-01 3G

205-01-013D 205-01-014

205-02-021J


205- 01-005A
205-01-00 7B
205-02-021K 205-01-00 7D



205-02-021F

205-02-02 1G 205-01-00 7C




31ST AVE
205-02-016F



205-01-010G
205-01-00 6A 205-01-008A




205-02-022V 205-02-016D
BL A CK
205-02-01 6E




C AN Y




205-02-022W
205-02-022J 205-02-02 2X ON HW
205-01-00 2A 205-01-00 4B


Y

PINNACLE VISTA DR
205-03-246


205-03-030 205-03-03 1
205-03-032



205-03-03 3
205-04-025K 205-04-025L 205-04-020F
205-04-03 5




29TH AVE
205-03-111


205-03-107 205-03-112
205-04-020E
205-03-034
205-03-110




205-03-108
205-03-10 9
205-03-035 205-04-02 5H



205-04-020G
31ST DR
205-04-003
Legend
205-03-036




205-03-085205-03-090
205-03-089 205-03-088 205-03-24 7
Zoning205-03-037
Petition Area 205-04-025J

Proposed Amendment Area

205-03-08 6 205-03-087
205-03-038
# of Lots/Tracts/Condos: 8/20 = 40%
Lots/Tracts/Condos
205-04-026C 205-04-026B % Area =205-04-018A
2.85ac./26.20ac. = 11%
3/4 VOTE NOT REQUIRED
205-03-039
Signed Petition
BAJADA DR
205-03-066 205-03-040
205-03-067
205- 03-068

Petition Verification Map
I 0 80 160 Feet
Map prepared by City of Phoenix, Planning and Development Services Dept. 2/12/2021
Page 294
for Z-53-20-1
CITY OF PHOENIX
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

FORM TO REQUEST PC to CC
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE CC HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON:
MARCH 3, 2021
APPLICATION NO/ Z-53-20-1 (SIGNATURE ON ORIGINAL IN FILE)
LOCATION Northeast corner of opposition x applicant
31st Avenue and
Pinnacle Vista Drive
Phoenix, AZ 85013 PC 2/4/2021 3031 West Oberlin Way
Phoenix, AZ 85083
PC DATE STREET/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
TO PC/CC CC 3/3/2021 Cheryl Colin
HEARING 602-499-4291
absoclean@msn.com
CC DATE NAME / PHONE / EMAIL
REASON FOR REQUEST:

Would like to keep S-1, but willing to change zoning to R1-8 under stipulation of 2 houses per
acre, no more than 32-24 houses.

I don't know what happened on the Feb 4th, 2021 zoom hearing when we were told no one
signed up to speak or no one opposed of this item. Quite a few of us did oppose this, sent in
letters, signed up to speak. As I was going around collecting signatures for this petition I had
so many people complain about the virtual meetings on zoom. Most of the them who signed
the petition did not know how to use the zoom which it made it a huge disadvantage for those
who opposed this. These hearings should have been postponed until we were able to meet in
person.

I don't understand where it states on the petition to be within 150 feet of the proposed
amendment. We are on 1 acre plus properties and it is well over 150 feet. We are pretty
spread out.

I have 2 letters attached that I am not sure who received them for the Feb 4th Hearing. I
would like to present them now. Again, these are opposing letters. Whether people wrote
letters, called, or zoomed into these hearings we had many that opposed.

RECEIVED BY: Racelle Escolar RECEIVED ON: 2/11/2021

Alan Stephenson Danielle Jordan
Joshua Bednarek Ra’Desha Williams
Tricia Gomes Village Planner
Racelle Escolar Samantha Keating
Stephanie Vasquez Paul M. Li
Leah Swanton GIS
Vikki Cipolla-Murillo Applicant




Page 295
From: Racelle Escolar
To: John/Cheryl Colin
Cc: Victoria C Murrillo
Subject: FW: Agenda#15 Case# Z-53-20-1
Date: Thursday, February 11, 2021 4:34:35 PM
Importance: High


Hello Cheryl,

I have received your appeal and request for a ¾ vote on Rezoning Case No. Z-53-20-1. We will
process this and let you know if a ¾ vote will be required.

Thanks,

Racelle Escolar, AICP
Planner III

Planning and Development Department
Planning Division
(602) 534-2864


From: John/Cheryl Colin
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 4:10 PM
To: Racelle Escolar
Subject: RE: Agenda#15 Case# Z-53-20-1




From: Racelle Escolar
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 8:20 AM
To: John/Cheryl Colin
Subject: RE: Agenda#15 Case# Z-53-20-1

Yes, you can fax it to 602-732-2094
This fax number has not been used for a while but it should work. Please be prepared to email as a
back-up though just in case.

Thanks,

Racelle Escolar, AICP
Planner III

Planning and Development Department
Planning Division
(602) 534-2864




Page 296
Page 297
Continuation of appeal form......

I Don't know what happened on the Feb 4th , 2021 zoom hearing when we were told no one signed up to
speak or no one opposed of this item. Quite a few of us did oppose this , sent in letters, signed up to
speak. As I was going around collecting signatures for this petition I had so many people complain about
the virtual meetings on zoom. Most of the them who signed the petition did not know how to use the
zoom which it made it a huge disadvantage for those who opposed this. These hearings should have
been postponed until we were able to meet in person.

I don't understand where it states on the petition to be within 150 feet of the proposed amendment.
We are on 1 acre plus properties and it is well over 150 feet. We are pretty spread out.
I have 2 letters attached that I am not sure who received them for the Feb 4th Hearing. I would like to
present them now. Again, these are opposing letters. Whether people wrote letters, called, or zoomed
into these hearings we had many that opposed.




Page 298
Page 299
Page 300
Page 301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Attachment G

David O Simmons

From: Jennifer Hall
Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 2:08 PM
To: David O Simmons
Cc: Jennifer Hall; Kayla Bertoldo; Tom Galvin
Subject: FW: KHOV Sterling Vista Revised Plan


David,

Happy New Year! Please see email below from Mitzi (Donna) Matthews who lives at 3110 W. Pinnacle Vista Drive (on
the NWC of 31st Ave and Pinnacle Vista). We have been working with Ms. Matthews on the Sterling Vista project to
ensure she has no issues with our proposed community. Please add to the case file and thanks!

Jennifer Hall
Senior Project Manager
Land Development Solutions Group

Direct: 480.505.3938
Cell: 602.369.0810

From: Mitzi
Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 1:04 PM
To: Jennifer Hall
Subject: Re: KHOV Sterling Vista Revised Plan

Yes,Everything looks OK to me. The entrances are especially good now.
mm

On Jan 4, 2021, at 11:42 AM, Jennifer Hall wrote:

Hi Mitzi – Happy New Year!

I just wanted to check in with you to see if you have any additional questions for me. We are scheduled for another
Village Planning Meeting next week – 1/14/21. This meeting, like the others, will be virtual.

As mentioned to you, the homebuilder, K.Hovnanian Homes, is willing to restrict ALL of the homes along 31 stAvenue to
single story as you requested in exchange for your support of the project. If you are agreeable please respond to this
email.

Thanks so much!

Jennifer Hall
Senior Project Manager
Land Development Solutions Group

Direct: 480.505.3938
Cell: 602.369.0810




Page 305
From: Jennifer Hall
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 5:11 PM
To: Mitzi Matthews
Cc: Jennifer Hall ; Kayla Bertoldo
Subject: RE: KHOV Sterling Vista Revised Plan

Hi Mitzi, thanks for your email. Originally, KHOV wanted to have their primary entrance off of 31 Avenue for marketing
purposes; however, after speaking with your neighbors just north of you they asked us to remove it and put the access
on the Frontage Rd. It’s not ideal for the homebuilder but it we are trying to make the neighborhood happy. We had to
get approval from ADOT and APS in order to do it and glad it worked out!

Will you be attending the meeting virtually? Thanks again for your comments!

Jennifer Hall
Senior Project Manager
Land Development Solutions Group

Direct: 480.505.3938
Cell: 602.369.0810

From: Mitzi Matthews
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 4:33 PM
To: Jennifer Hall
Subject: Re: KHOV Sterling Vista Revised Plan

Looks very good and practical for all. I was wondering before why there was no access directly to the I-17 access road.
i’m Mitzi (Donna) on all documents except haven’t got house changed yet. Long story.

On Dec 17, 2020, at 2:17 PM, Jennifer Hall wrote:

Hi Donna,

I’m resending you this information and would love to hear your thoughts. Our team will be presenting this revised plan
to the community during this evening’s Village Planning Committee hearing.








Page 306
David O Simmons

From: George Cannon
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 2:06 PM
To: David O Simmons
Cc: George Cannon
Subject: Sterling Vista (Case# Z-53-20-1)


Dear Mr. Simmons,

RE: Sterling Vista (Case# Z-53-20-1)

I support this project!

The community being proposed by K. Hovnanian Homes is exactly what the city has envisioned for this area and I believe
the home builder has done a fantastic job working with the surrounding neighbors. There have been many changes
made to the site plan to resolve concerns voiced by immediate neighbors including moving the access points away from
the existing homes and onto the frontage road and restricting the homes along the north and west boundaries to single
story. I live in the community and feel that this project will be a real benefit to the surrounding area. It will take a
vacant parcel that is currently used as a dumping ground and will bring quality single family homes (not apartments!)
that will complement the area. Please support this project!

George Cannon
3123 W Redbird Rd. Phoenix , AZ 85083

--
George E. Cannon

C-602-819-3349 - Direct
thecannongroupllc@gmail.com
--
George E. Cannon

C-602-819-3349 - Direct
thecannongroupllc@gmail.com





Page 307
David O Simmons

From: Jennifer Hall
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 9:11 AM
To: David O Simmons
Cc: Jennifer Hall; Kayla Bertoldo
Subject: Sterling Vista Development Support Letter


Good Morning David,

Please see email in support of our Sterling Vista Case# Z-53-20 and distribute to VPC members, if possible. Mike Doles is
one of the adjacent neighbors to the north. Thanks!

Jennifer Hall
Senior Project Manager
Land Development Solutions Group

Direct: 480.505.3938
Cell: 602.369.0810

From: dolesrwextoo@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 9:01 AM
To: Jennifer Hall
Subject: Sterling Vista Development


Good morning Jennifer!

We have been in contact with this development and its progress through the efforts of Jennifer Hall. There have been
some concessions to myself and Danny Enna along the North boundary of this project which make it much more palatable
for myself and I assume Mr. Enna. We are the closest of the nearby neighbors.

Jennifer has been speaking on behalf of the developer in a clear and timely manner, with site plans as well as
descriptions of everything.

I am in favor of this project and wish them well! A further advantage not discussed is the curtailment of gangs/juveniles
that constantly deface that property and race vehicles around the lot. It will also stop unscrupulous developers from
dumping their debris all over this acreage!

Thank You,
Michael Doles
27632 N. Black Canyon Hwy





Page 308
Attachment H

David O Simmons

From: RKWeinberg at RKWeinberg.net
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:35 PM
To: David O Simmons
Cc: RKWeinberg; Jennifer Hall
Subject: Rezoning Case number: Z-53-20-1


David Simmons,

Regarding:

DEER VALLEY VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE meeting open to the public on Thursday, December 17, 2020, at 6:00 p.m.

Case number: Z-53-20-1
Presentation, discussion, and possible recommendation regarding a request to rezone 15.52 acres located on
the northeast corner of 31st Avenue and Pinnacle Vista Drive from S-1 (Ranch or Farm Residence) to R1-8
(Single-family Residence District) to allow single-family residential.

I oppose the project for various reasons.

1. The density of the project does not fit in with the community. Although there are three ‘developments’ in the
area, they have all been here since around 2002 and nothing has been built or developed since then except for
S1 property as S1 property. The current exception is a Taylor Morrison project located southeast of the
Dynamite and 39th Ave alignments. That development has 1.4 du/acre.

This is a rural area and most of us live here because of that lifestyle. The high-density housing proposed by K.
Hovnanian Homes does not fit in this area at all. Houses crammed together 10 feet apart on ‘postage stamp’ size
lots will degrade to rural feel of the area. Nothing in this area has lots as small as what is being proposed.

2. Traffic and traffic noise.

There will be a lot more traffic and its associated noise will be added to our area.

I live on Pinnacle Vista. Actually, my back yard backs up to Pinnacle Vista. There are 10 homes on the south side
of Pinnacle Vista between 33rd Ave. and 31st Ave. (including mine). The speed limit is 30 MPH. Already a lot of
people consider it a speedway and speed up and down that road. It is noisy. On the north side of Pinnacle Vista
between 31st Ave. and 33rd Ave. are S1 properties.

If the development is built with 61 homes, I estimate that there will be 100+ more cars driving on Pinnacle Vista
between 33rd Ave. and 31st Ave. every day. That is a lot of traffic and a lot of noise.

The most common way people enter and exit our area is from Happy Valley Road and 35th Ave.

Another way to enter our area is to travel north on I17 up to Dixileta, make a U- turn and come south on the I17 frontage
road.

I talked with Chris Williams of Y2K Engineering at the original meeting with the project personnel and his assumption is
that most traffic will enter the area by going up to Dixileta, making the U-turn and coming south on the I17 frontage


Page 309
road. He assumed 70% of the traffic will use that path. He is WRONG. The most commonly used entrance to our area is
via Happy Valley Road and 35th Avenue.

Where we live is quiet at night. We hear coyotes. We hear horses. We don’t need the noise that a dense development
will bring (traffic and human related noise).

I am sure that K. Hovnanian Homes develops nice homes. But, the feel of the existing community must be considered
when proposing a deviation to the current environment. We are rural and want to remain rural.

With all due respect, I request that this development NOT be allowed.

Thank you.

Roy Weinberg
3132 West Buckhorn Trail
Phoenix, Arizona 85083-5829
602-571-1045
rkweinberg@rkweinberg.net


--
Roy Weinberg
rkweinberg@rkweinberg.net
http://www.rkweinberg.net [rkweinberg.net]





Page 310
David O Simmons

From: John/Cheryl Colin
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 6:34 PM
To: David O Simmons
Subject: #7 Case# Z-53-20-1


Hi David,
I would lIke to speak regarding the this case. Please register me.
I am very concerned about the traffic in our neighborhood. This is supposed to be a rural comm where horses can be
rode etc.. and with this project going in along with the one at deems hill there is going to be a tremendous amount of
traffic in the neighborhood. We already have issues with the amount of traffic and cars speeding. This will just add to it.
We all moved out here for reason to get away from the city. We are trying to keep this a
community rural/farming properties. We don’t want the zoning changed at all. Would like to keep this one house per
acre. Its all about the money, once the builders come in and make their profit then they leave and we have to put up
with all the crime and over populated neighborhood. We also have another project that is going in just north of the
canal. How much more are we going to cram back into this once quiet unknown neighborhood.

Thank You
Cheryl Colin





Page 311
12/1/2020


Mr. Simmons,
I am writing this to voice my opposition to the proposed zoning change, Case # Z-53-20-1. The
proposed development of 61 homes will have a significant impact on traffic in the area and is not
compatible with the surrounding area.

The traffic study presented by the developer is faulty and has no basis for the assumptions made. The
study fails to address the already re-zoned properties that are/will be developed and will increase traffic
load on the limited egress routes into/out of the area. More importantly, the assumption that only 10-
percent of the trips made from and 30-percent of the trip to the proposed development will use 33 rd
Avenue is completely baseless. Consider the following:
 Shopping, including grocery/convenience/Starbucks/etc., are on Happy Valley Road and will be
accessed via 33rd Ave
 Local Schools are most easily accessed via 33rd ave to Happy Valley
 Local gas stations are on Happy Valley Road and will be accessed via 33 rd Ave
 The shortest driving route to the development from northbound I-17 will be via Happy Valley.
Mapping apps on cell phones/computers are going to direct drivers to use this route.

Anyone with an understanding of how people go about their daily activities should understand that the
33rd Avenue route will be uses significantly more than what is assumed. An “engineered”, and I use that
term loosely, document should not take place over a common sense understanding of the situation.

The house density is excessive considering the rural character of the area. Yes, there are some portions
of developments in the general area that have similar density, but they are not in the immediate area of
the proposed development. These, higher density developments already do not fit into the rural
character of the area. There are a sufficient number of these to provide adequate diversity in the
neighborhood. We don’t need another one and the additional traffic/people/crime potential that
comes with it.

The developer has stated that the houses on the northern part of the project would be restricted to
single story, indicating that there are plans for two story units elsewhere. With four-plus houses per
acre and two-story units, this development would give a “being in a canyon feeling” when traveling
down streets. This would not be compatible with the surrounding properties or the rural nature of the
area.

If rezoning is to occur, a maximum density of 3.0 houses/acre should be stipulated. That would ensure
the development was compatible with the area and would reduce the negative effect of traffic on the
established residents. Please see Figure 1 (next page) for visual representation of egress route
limitations and rezoned properties that will increase traffic load in area.




Page 312
12/1/2020


Figure 1




Please review my correspondence and add it to the file related to the proposed zoning change and
associated development. Thank You,

Kenneth A. Vest, 27635 N 37th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85083




Page 313
Dear Committee/ Board Members, February 2, 2021



Hi, my name is Cheryl Colin I live at 3031 W Oberlin Way. I live on S‐1 farming property. We have
horses, chickens’ turtles etc.…

I feel this hearing should be delayed due to the Covid 19, so the people can attend in person. This whole
technology thing is difficult for most. We are old school; you know like pen and paper. Half the people
can’t attend because they don’t have a computer or don’t know how.

My concern is traffic and over crowding the neighborhood.

It would be nice if you all could come and see our unique little neighborhood. These builders want to
come in and build a ridiculous amount of houses in one area. If you had a visual, I think you would
better understand.

We are surrounded by so many other places people can live, and there is so much land around us to
build on. We don’t have a housing shortage. Why build so many houses in such a small condensed area.
The builder wants to make a quick buck and leave us to deal with higher crime, more traffic, and rentals.
We need to keep it S‐1 farming, 1 house per Arce. Let me tell you of all the areas that are going up
around us. Some have broke ground and others have not. I made a list below.

The 43 homes (Taylor Morris) going up right now west of us in the neighborhood that must filter thru
the neighborhood to get out. We only have 2 ways out, the access road and 33rd Ave which turns into
35th Ave.

I have heard this saying before and not just this last hearing but other ones we have fought. “ but it is
unfortunate that this happens” Well it does not have to be unfortunate. Leave it for what it is “Rural S‐1
Farming for horses, chickens’ cows, goats not a bunch of track homes. This is a unique rural
neighborhood we are trying to keep that way. We ride horses and don’t need an over whelming amount
of traffic. When friends come over, they have said “this is cool never new this existed back here”. That is
the feeling we are trying to keep. A lot of us are retiring back here. I have been here for over 18+ years
and others a lot longer. We are tucked away people don’t really know of this neighborhood. There is so
much land around us out of this neighborhood that can be built on. I think most of us would settle for 2
houses per acre just to stop the builders from coming into our neighborhood.

Sometimes I ask myself is this committee for the builders or the people. We all don’t have the money for
fancy lawyers like some of these big builders do to fight this, like Taylor Morrison who we lost against
and houses are going in as we speak and Pederson by the high school another one we lost, and 325 units
are going in . These all will impact our neighborhood.

At the last meeting the traffic engineer gave statistics on traffic, but he was only counting what they
want to build not everything that is in the works or has not stated yet that will also impact our
neighborhood. To me this is not accurate.




Page 314
Here is a list of other areas that exist, broke ground or is going to break ground:

Avilla Canyon Apts and the Bungalow at Jomax on the East side of the freeway. They must go north onto
Dixaletta and south down our Access road. The only way out for them. (Exists)

43 houses by Taylor Morrison in our neighborhood at Deems Hill recreation area (broke ground)

173 houses North of the Canal (west side of freeway) only way out is access Rd (have not broke ground)

325 Units across from high school 35th ave and Happy Valley (broke ground)

57 houses 31st Ave and Pinnacle Peak (Nothing)

Pocono way and 33rd Ave Houses going up on the hill. Only way out of the neighborhood is down 35th
ave. (have not broke ground)

Next to USAA across from Norterra Shopping more housing ( broke ground)

Union Park 19th Ave between Happy Valley and Jomax 1100 single family homes in progress and 1100
multi family units. (broke ground halfway completed).

More Apts east of 19th ave on Happy Valley. I can go on and on

Not a housing shortage in this area.

I want to thank Russell Osborne (member of the board) for being our voice he stated exactly what we
are trying to say.

Please vote to keep this what we live for “Our Rural neighborhood” S‐1 Farming 1 house per Arce.
Living this type of lifestyle has really molded my boys into the respectable, hardworking young men they
are today. I would recommend this lifestyle to anyone.



Thank You,

Cheryl Colin




Page 315
Rcvd 2/3/2021

My name is Dustin Hamilton. I live at 3115 W Oberlin Way

I am opposed to this zoning change Z-53-20-1

My main concern is that there has been no clear explanation as to how all the new construction in this
area will affect our local schools. I have a son who attends Sandra Day Oconner High School. We
accompanied him last year to see the school, and it was clearly overcrowded.

I cannot understand how the city can keep approving housing developments while the schools around
this area are so overcrowded. There is a huge problem in our state retaining quality teachers and
providing a good education for our students. There is a correlation between the amount of housing being
granted and the number of new students going into our schools. I believe part of the education problem in
our state is due to overcrowding and not enough infrastructure. How can a student get quality education
in an overcrowded classroom? Why would a teacher want to teach in a situation where there are almost
40 pupils in a class?

I realize that right now class sizes are small due to COVID 19, but as we edge out of this the kids will start
coming back to full capacity, especially now that the CDC has said the classroom is the best places for
students.

In the last year, the district area around Sandra Day Oconner has approved a 300 plus unit apartment
complex, and two other new housing tracts, about another 70 homes. The zoning change Z-53-20-1 is
requesting another change to our zoning from 1 house per acre to 4 houses per acre, adding another 57
homes to this area. These homes will have kids that need to go to school somewhere. How is it
responsible to continue to approve all these homes without having a proper educational environment in
place???? I have not heard of any proposal to build a new school to accommodate the influx of students.

This question was asked at the village planning committee meeting, and someone mumbled something
about there were studies done to show that this was all ok. What studies??? Who is doing these studies?
Where are the results of these studies to be found? Any sort of clarification on how all these
developments are impacting our schools should be made public knowledge. I am skeptical that these
studies exist, and if they do, where are the results?

The builder does not need to build so many houses in this proposed area. They can easily build fewer
homes, but as I have seen so many times before, they suffer no consequences for the impact they have
on the area the build in. It’s just another example of greed over responsibility. Can someone please put a
hold on more development until some more infrastructure is in place?

I understand that the city is in need of more housing, but can it be done responsibly? I am not opposed to
this tract of land being developed, but the number of houses they are proposing is too high. There has
been a frenzy of zoning change approvals and soon to be an influx of people in this area. This area is
almost built out and I just don’t see the sense in approving another irresponsible tract of homes to an
already overcrowded area.

The city has made it clear that support the Red for Ed movement, yet they continue to support home
developers without acknowledging that they are a part of the problem when it comes to our education
system.

Therefore, I feel like the builder has an opportunity to develop this property at a reasonable number of
homes, but refuses to do so because they really want to maximize their profits… at our expense. That
high number homes will affect our area.

I know the builder has had some traffic experts look at our area, but that person does not live around
here. We all complain about the traffic in this area because it really is a problem. Between the drag racing




Page 316
on the frontage road and the reckless driving on 33rd ave, we have all experienced bad situations while
driving around here. This is another example of not enough infrastructure. There is never a police patrol
in this area. We need a police officer around once in awhile.

There are no tract homes between Pinnacle Vista and Oberlin way. Or from the I17 to 39th Ave. This is a
small area with a more rural feel in the middle of the city. These small lots don’t belong here. All we ask is
less density for this particular neighborhood. This tract of homes does not flow with the surrounding one
acre homesites.

We are all personally invested in this area. I paid for the speed humps all along 31st Ave. I also built my
home myself. I built here, what I hoped would be my forever home, because I was under the impression
that this area was going to maintain it’s great zoning, not be reduced to a high density zoned area.

In conclusion, how many kids can we squeeze into the schools around here?. My son and all the kids
around here deserve a decent educational experience. What’s the breaking point for the schools around
here, especially Sandra Day Oconner high School? The lack of infrastructure around here is a real issue.
Allowing more high density is compounding that problem.

I ask that that representatives for the city of Phoenix deny this zoning change… there are some critical
infrastructure issues that need to be resolved here before granting more builders the ability to profit off of
our area.

Thank you.

Dustin Hamilton




Page 317



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
***ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (SEE ATTACHED MEMO)*** Public Hearing and
Ordinance Adoption - Amend City Code - Rezoning Application Z-56-20-4 -
Southeast Corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street (Ordinance G-6818)

Request to hold a public hearing on a proposal to amend the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix, by adopting Rezoning
Application Z-56-20-4 and rezone the site from R-3 (Multifamily Residence District)
and R-5 (Multifamily Residence District) to WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code,
Transect 5:5 District, Transit Uptown Character Area) for multifamily residential.

Summary
Current Zoning: R-3 (Multifamily Residence District) (0.18-acres) and R-5 (Multifamily
Residence District) (3.11 acres)
Proposed Zoning: WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:5 District,
Transit Uptown Character Area)
Acreage: 3.29 acres
Proposed Use: Multifamily residential

Owner: Donor Network of Arizona
Applicant: Trinsic Residential Group, Todd Gosselink
Representative: Withey Morris, PLC, Jason Morris

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Alhambra Village Planning Committee heard this case on Jan. 26,
2021 and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 15-1.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Feb. 4, 2021 and
recommended approval, per the Alhambra Village Planning Committee
recommendation with an additional stipulation, by a vote of 7-1.
The Planning Commission recommendation was appealed on Feb. 10, 2021 and a
petition for a 3/4 vote was submitted on Feb. 11, 2021. A 3/4 vote is required.

Location
Southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street
Council District: 4
Parcel Addresses: 201 W. Coolidge St.


Page 318


Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning and
Development Department.




Page 319
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN
(Z-56-20-4) FROM R-3 (MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT)
AND R-5 (MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT) TO WU CODE
T5:5 UT (WALKABLE URBAN CODE, TRANSECT 5:5 DISTRICT,
TRANSIT UPTOWN CHARACTER AREA).

____________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 3.29-acre property located at the southeast

corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street, in a portion of Section 20, Township 2 North,

Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A”, is hereby changed from

0.18-acres of “R-3” (Multifamily Residence District) and 3.11 acres of “R-5” (Multifamily

Residence District) to “WU Code T5:5 UT” (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:5 District,

Transit Uptown Character Area).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B”.




Page 320
SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,

violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
incorporate Walkable Urban Code Frontage Types described in Section 1305
for a minimum 40 percent of the building face(s), as approved by the Planning
and Development Department. For the purpose applying the above provisions,
the above shall be treated as a Secondary Frontage with regard to glazing.

2. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
contain architectural embellishments, design detailing, and / or space
programming to activate and provide visual access onto the canal, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department. Examples of
appropriate enhancements may include textural changes, offsets, recesses,
variation in window size and location, overhang canopies, balconies with a
depth greater of than 3 feet, and amenities such as gathering spaces.

3. Between the southern mass of the building and the south property line (the
Grand Canal right-of-way), the developer shall plant minimum 3-inch caliper,
large canopy shade trees, at a minimum frequency of 25 feet on center or in
equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

4. The provisions of Section 1310.A.2. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance shall
apply to require shaded open space of which a minimum 50 percent shall be
situated adjacent to the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-way), as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.

5. No solid perimeter wall greater than 36 inches in height shall be oriented to
and located within 30 feet of the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-
way), as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The developer shall provide traffic calming to slow vehicle traffic exiting the
property with specific regard to pedestrian safety on the public sidewalk, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. The developer shall provide a minimum of two direct and accessible
pedestrian connections from the amenity areas located south of the building
mass to the shared use path along the Grand Canal Trail, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.




Page 321
8. The developer shall provide and maintain the following bicycle infrastructure
as described below and as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

a. A bicycle repair station (fix-it station) along the southern edge
of the site, visible, and accessible from the public sidewalk and
/ or the Grand Canal Trail. The station shall include but not
limited to: standard repair tools affixed to the station; a tire
gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair stand which allows
pedals and wheels to spin freely while adjusting the bike.

b. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section
1307.H.6.d. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be
secured parking.

c. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be
provided at a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a
maximum of 50 spaces near entrances of buildings and
installed per the requirements of Section 1306.H. of the
Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

9. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

10. This parcel is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) called Zone A, on panel
1740 L of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) dated October 16, 2013.
The following requirements shall apply, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. The Architect/Engineer is required to show the floodplain
boundary limits on the Grading and Drainage plan and ensure
that impacts to the proposed facilities have been considered,
following the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Regulations (44 CFR Paragraph 60.3); this includes, but not
limited to provisions in the latest versions of the Floodplain
Ordinance of the Phoenix City Code.

b. A copy of the Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to
the Floodplain Management section of Public Works
Department for review and approval of Floodplain
requirements.

c. The developer shall provide a FEMA approved CLOMR-F or
CLOMR prior to issuance of a Grading and Drainage permit.



Page 322
11. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

12. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix for the site, per the content and form prescribed by the City Attorney
prior to final site plan approval.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for
the Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.


SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of March 2021.




________________________________
MAYOR




ATTEST:


____________________________City Clerk


APPROVED AS TO FORM:


Page 323
____________________________City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager


Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (2 Pages)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




Page 324
EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-56-20-4

A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 2
NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND
MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE CALCULATED CENTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION
20, BEING THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL AVENUE AND CAMPBELL
AVENUE AS REFERENCED IN THE MONUMENT CORNER TIES FOR LINE
SECTION 2 CENTRAL PHOENIX LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT, IN
DOCUMENT 2009-0003295, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;
THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 20 SECONDS WEST, ALONG
THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20,
A DISTANCE OF 1,318.52 FEET TO A CITY OF PHOENIX BRASS CAP
FLUSH “RLS 39131” MARKING THE CENTERLINE OF 3RD AVENUE AND
CAMPBELL AVENUE;
THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 06 MINUTES 20 SECONDS WEST, ALONG
THE CENTERLINE OF SAID 3RD AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 564.11 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 00 DEGREES 06 MINUTES 20 SECONDS
WEST ALONG SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF 416.71 FEET TO THE
CENTERLINE OF 3RD AVENUE AND COOLIDGE STREET, BEING SOUTH
1.69 FEET AND 3.40 FEET OF TWO CITY OF PHOENIX BRASS CAPS;
THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 27 MINUTES 41 SECONDS EAST, ALONG
THE CENTERLINE OF SAID COOLIDGE STREET A DISTANCE OF 358.31
FEET, BEING 966.10 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL
AVENUE AND COOLIDGE STREET;
THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 25 SECONDS WEST, A
DISTANCE OF 348.85, FEET DEPARTING SAID COOLIDGE STREET, ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF PARCEL 1 OF THAT SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
RECORDED IN 2001-0882094, AND THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION
THEREOF, TO A POINT 25 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE
OF SAID PARCEL 1, MEASURED AT 90 DEGREES;
THENCE ALONG A 25 FOOT SOUTHERLY OFFSET OF THE SOUTH LINES
FOR LOTS 15, 17 AND 19 OF ‘SUBURBAN ACRES’ AS RECORDED IN
BOOK 13, PAGE 22 RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA,
SOUTH 72 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 53 SECONDS WEST, DISTANCE OF
65.89 FEET;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY OFFSET, SOUTH 74
DEGREES 12 MINUTES 10 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 147.10 FEET;




Page 325
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY OFFSET, SOUTH 78
DEGREES 50 MINUTES 02 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 123.95 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 53 MINUTES 40 SECONDS WEST, A
DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 142,789 SQUARE FEET OR 3.278 ACRES, MORE OR
LESS.




Page 326
Page 327
$WWDFKPHQW%




Staff Report Z-56-20-4
January , 2021

Alhambra Village Planning Committee January 26, 2021
Meeting Date:
Planning Commission Hearing Date: February 4, 2021
Request From: R-3 (Multifamily Residence District)
(0.18 acres) and R-5 (Multifamily
Residence District) (3.11 acres)
Request To: WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban
Code, Transect 5:5, Uptown Character
Area) (3.29 acres)
Proposed Use: Multifamily Residential
Location: Southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and
Coolidge Street
Owner: Donor Network of Arizona

Applicant: Trinsic Residential Group, Todd
Gosselink
Representative: Withey Morris PLC, Jason Morris

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations

General Plan Conformity

Residential 15+
General Plan Land Use Map Designation
Dwelling Units Per Acre


Local Varies from 30 to 40
3rd Avenue
Street foot east half street
Street Map
Classification
Local Varies from 25 to 30
Coolidge Street
Street foot south half street




Page 328
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; OPPORTUNITY SITES; LAND
USE PRINCIPLE: Promote and encourage compatible development and
redevelopment with a mix of housing types in neighborhoods close to
employment centers, commercial areas, and where transit or transportation
alternatives exist.
The development, as proposed, will create new housing opportunities in the area and
within close proximity to a light rail station, the educational facilities, and the North
Central Avenue Employment Center, especially via the Grand Canal Multiuse Trail.

CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; COMPLETE STREETS;
DESIGN PRINCIPLE: Locate parking to the rear of a site to create a more
pedestrian environment, when adequate shielding from noise and light can be
provided to adjacent established neighborhoods. On-street parking in some
areas may also promote a pedestrian environment.
The development, as required by provisions of the Walkable Urban Code, will situate
buildings to frame the street environment with vehicle parking lots situated at the
interior of the site and to allow for the creation of a comfortable pedestrian
environment along the public streets. Further, the development, as stipulated, will
screen parking from the Grand Canal and its multiuse trail.

BUILD THE SUSTAINABLE DESERT CITY CORE VALUE; TREE AND SHADE;
DESIGN PRINCIPLE: Integrate trees and shade into the design of new
development and redevelopment projects throughout Phoenix.
The development, as stipulated, will create an attractive streetscape with detached
and shaded sidewalks. The shade incorporated into the development along its
frontages will reduce the urban heat island effect and increase thermal comfort which
will make the area more walkable, bikeable, and sustainable.

CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; BICYCLES; DESIGN
PRINCIPLE: Development should include convenient bicycle parking.
The development, as stipulated, includes bicycle parking and bicycle facilities as a
central component of the project to facilitate bicycling as a way of life. Features
include secure bicycle parking for residents, convenient racks for guests, and a
bicycle repair station situated as a public amenity; together, these features will
complement the Grand Canal and its multiuse trail.




Page 329
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; CANALS AND TRAILS;
LAND USE PRINCIPLES: Plan, design, and develop pedestrian linkages
between parks, open spaces, village cores, neighborhood shopping centers,
neighborhood schools, and neighboring municipalities.
The subject site is immediately adjacent to the Grand Canal which recently was
improved through the Canalscape Project and provides regional connectivity, direct
connections to Phoenix Central High School, the Phoenix Coding Academy, Xavier
&ROOHJH3UHSDUDWRU\, Brophy &ROOHJH3UHSDUDWRU\, Steele Indian School Park, and
access to Central Avenue and the rail. The development, as stipulated, will add
vitality to this section of the Grand Canal and its multiuse trail as a community asset.


Applicable Plans, Overlays, and Initiatives

Transit Oriented Development Strategic Policy Framework: Background Item No.
5.
Uptown Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan: Background Item No. 6.
Tree and Shade Master Plan: Background Item No. 9.
Complete Streets Guidelines: Background Item No. 10.
Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan: Background Item No. 11.
Housing Phoenix: Background Item No. 12.
Reimagine Phoenix: Background Item No. 13.


Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning
Land Use Zoning
On Site Office R-3 and R-5
East Multifamily R-5
North (across Coolidge
Various residential R-3 and R-5
Street
South (across the
Multifamily R-4
Grand Canal)
West Single-family residential R-3




Page 330
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




Walkable Urban Code
Transect 5:5 UT
Provisions on the
Standards Requirements
Proposed Site Plan
Gross Acreage No minimum 3.29
Total Number of Units No maximum 218 units
Density No maximum 66.26
Building Height 56 foot maximum 56 feet (Met)
Parking Structure Height Cannot exceed building height 58 feet (Not Met*)
Streetscape Standards (Section 1312.E)
Minor Collector and Local Minimum sidewalk width: 5 feet 5 feet (Met)
Streets Minimum landscape width: 5 5 feet (Met)
feet (if no public utility conflict)
Main Building Setbacks
Primary Frontage (Coolidge 12 foot maximum Varies but less than
Street) 12 feet (Met)
Secondary Frontage (3rd 10 foot maximum 10 feet (Met)
Avenue)
Non Street (South and East) 0 foot minimum 15 feet and 10 feet
respectively (Met)
Parking Setbacks
Primary Frontage 30 foot minimum or behind Behind building
building (Met)
Secondary Frontage 20 foot minimum with a 10 foot Behind building
landscape setback measured (Met)
from the street right of way
Rear (West) 0 foot minimum Behind building
(Met)
Lot Requirements
Lot Coverage 80 percent maximum 73 percent (Met
Primary Building Frontage 70 percent minimum 94 percent (Met)
Secondary Building Frontage 50 percent minimum 83 percent (Met)




Page 331
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




Walkable Urban Code
Transect 5:6 UT (Cont.)
Provisions on the
Standards Requirements
Proposed Site Plan
Frontage Types Allowed
Primary Frontage All frontages or alternative Storefront and
(Coolidge Street) frontages as per Section Stoop / Doorwell,
1305.B.1.c Met)
Secondary Frontage All frontages or alternative Stoop / Doorwell,
(3rd Avenue) frontages as per Section Met)
1305.B.1.c
Entry Requirements Common Entry: minimum one Not provided.
per 50 feet of primary building
frontage and one per 80 feet of
secondary frontage.

Other frontages as per Table
1305.1
Glazing Requirements Ground floor and second floor Not provided.
T4 standards apply for 25 percent minimum.
multifamily
Second floor (east and west):
10 percent minimum

Upper floors: not applicable
*Site plan adjustment required

Background/Issues/Analysis

SUBJECT SITE
1. This request is to rezone 3.29 acres at the southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and
Coolidge Street from R-3 (Multifamily Residence District) and R-5 (Multifamily
Residence District) to WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code Transect 5:5,
Uptown Character Area).

SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
2. The proposed zoning of WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code Transect 5:5,
Uptown Character Area) permits a maximum height of 56 feet. The site is
currently developed with an office building. The Zoning Context Map depicts the
zoning entitlements of the subject site and the surrounding area.




Page 332
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




East: Immediately east of Title: Zoning Context Map
the subject site is a
multifamily complex which
is zoned R-5 (Multifamily
Residence District). The
zoning permits a maximum
height of 48 feet but the
existing buildings do not
exceed three stories in
height.

West: West of the subject
site across 3rd Avenue are
residential structures of a Source: Planning and Development Department
single-story and single
-family detached character. The R-3 (Multifamily Residence District) zoning
permits a maximum height of 30 feet by right, and up to 48 feet with increased
setbacks.

North: North of the subject site across Coolidge Street are various residential
structures ranging from a single-family detached character to small apartment
complex, with neither type exceeding two stories. The approximate west half of
sites immediately north of the subject site are zoned R-3 (Multifamily Residence
District) which permits a maximum height of 30 feet by right, and up to 48 feet
with increased setbacks, and the remaining sites to the east are zoned R-5
(Multifamily Residence District) which permits a maximum height of 48 feet.

South (the Grand Canal): South of the subject site is the Grand Canal which
was recently improved through the Canalscape project which brought lighting,
landscaping, and seating improvements to this section of the canal.

South (beyond the Grand Canal): South of the subject site across the Grand
Canal is a multifamily community zoned R-4 (Multifamily Residence District)
which permits a maximum height of 48 feet.

3. Located along Central Avenue and several properties east of the subject site is
the Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One (TOD-1). The primary
purpose of TOD-1 was to encourage an appropriate mixture and density of
activity around transit stations to increase ridership along the light rail corridor
and promote alternative modes of transportation to the automobile while the
Walkable Urban Code was developed.




Page 333
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
4. The General Plan Title: General Plan Land Use Map Excerpt
Land Use Map
depicts a land use
designation of
Residential 15+
dwelling units per
acre which is
consistent with the
density proposed.

Surrounding the
subject site are
designations for
multifamily
densities including Source: Planning and Development Department
Residential 15+ dwelling units per acre to the south and east and Residential 10
to 15 dwelling units per acre to the north and west. The proposed use and
density of the subject site is consistent with the surrounding context.

5. The Encanto Village Character Plan was approved and adopted in the Phoenix
General Plan through General Plan Amendment GPA-1-19. Each of the 15
Urban Villages have a Character Plan.

The proposed project advances the following items identified in the Encanto
Village Character Plan: encourage growth along the light rail; integrating canals
into project design; and new development being consistent with adopted plans.

One such area of alignment is with the North Central Employment Center
(profile attached) which identifies the presence of approximately 770,000 young,
well-educated, workers within a 10 to 20 minute drive and projected growth of
170,000 new residents within a 30 minute drive. The proposed development will
provide housing opportunities for the growing population in proximity to the
growing employment center while also reducing the need for long vehicle
commutes.




Page 334
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




6. Transit Oriented Title: Transit Oriented Development Strategic Policy
Development Strategic Framework Place Type Map
Policy Framework:
The Transit Oriented
Development Strategic Policy
Framework is part of the
City’s General Plan. The
framework identifies planning
typologies to describe urban
environments in terms of
appropriate scale and
intensity

As depicted on the right, the
subject site is located within
one-quarter mile from two
light rail stations. The nearest
station, Central and
Campbell, is identified in the
Strategic Policy Framework
as a Minor Urban Center Source: Planning and Development Department
Place Type.

The Minor Urban Center Place Type is characterized by two to five story
buildings with allowances for up to seven when incentive criteria are met or
when a special circumstance exists. The proposed development, using the
Walkable Urban Code and depicting a height of four stories, is consistent with
the Minor Urban Center Place Type.

7. Uptown Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan:
The subject site is located within the Uptown TOD Planning Area which is
depicted on the following page. The policy plan adopted for the Uptown TOD
District provides a blueprint for fully achieving the transformative potential of
light rail in a sustainable manner. Changes advocated in the plan can lower
transportation costs for residents, create new business opportunities, encourage
active, healthy lifestyles, ensure Phoenix increases its competitive advantage in
the global marketplace, and improve prosperity by growing the economy in
locations with existing infrastructure and public services.




Page 335
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




While the subject site is Title: Uptown TOD Planning Area
not mapped for a specific
recommended transect for
redevelopment, the
Uptown TOD District Plan
provides the following
direction relevant to the
subject site:

Activating the Grand
Canalscape:
The Uptown TOD Plan
describes at length the
importance and
opportunity of embracing
the Grand Canal as an
open space amenity, as a
regional active Source: Planning and Development Department
transportation trail, and as
waterfront. While the Canalscape Project is complete, it is the projects adjacent
to the Grand Canal that will enliven the waterfront.

Increase the Population Using Alternative Transportation: .
The Uptown TOD Plan includes several measurable outcomes focused on
increasing ridership on the light rail, increasing the number of individuals riding
bikes or walking to work, and decreasing the number of Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT). The proposed project will position new households within walking and
bicycling distance to jobs, schools, and major park facilities.

PROPOSAL
8. Site Plan
As depicted on the conceptual site plans and elevations on the following pages,
the proposal is for four floors of housing with five levels of parking located at the
interior of the site. The site plan depicts one point of vehicular access from
Coolidge Street. The site plan depicts 218 dwelling units with 46 studios, 116
one-bedroom, and 56 two-bedroom units. At a rate of 1.3 parking spaces per
studio and 1.5 spaces per one and two bedroom units, the code would require
318 parking spaces but due to the proximity to light rail, a 10 percent reduction
is applied for a total of 287 spaces.




Page 336
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




Title: Conceptual Site Plan




Source: Rich Barber Architects

The ground floor units fronting 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street will employ
stoop and doorwell frontages and the main leasing area oriented to Coolidge
Street will employ a storefront frontage; these ground level treatments abide by
the intent of the Walkable Urban Code to active the street frontage in addition to
detached sidewalks and trees planted between the curb and sidewalk as
required by the Walkable Urban Code.

The conceptual site plan depicts frontage types along the southern face of the



Page 337
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




building mass to activate the interface with the canal. Staff is recommending
Stipulation No. 1 to require the frontage types along 40 percent of the canal
oriented building frontage.

9. Canal Interface
The conceptual site plan and building elevations depict measures intended to
embrace and activate the frontage to the Grand Canal including amenity areas,
common areas, bike racks, a bicycle repair station, vegetation, and a perimeter
wall comprised mostly of view fence for ground level transparency. The Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance governs canal interface through the design standards
contained in Section 507 Tab A.

To advance the intent of the design guidelines and the Walkable Urban Code,
staff is recommending a series of stipulations to provide additional specificity
regarding improvements to the area between the southern mass of the building
and the Grand Canal right-of-way including the following:

x Stipulation No. 1: To require Walkable Urban Code Frontage Types along
a minimum 50 percent of the canal-facing building façade.
x Stipulation No. 2: To require architectural enhancements along the canal-
facing building façade.
x Stipulation No. 3: To require large canopy shade trees to soften the canal
environment and provide thermal comfort in the amenity areas and near
the canal.
o Due to the presence of an SRP easement at this location, the
extent to which the developer will be allowed to improve this are is
unknown and, therefore, the stipulation contains the language “as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development
Department.
x Stipulation No. 4: To require shaded open space adjacent to the canal
right-of-way through the application of Section 1310.A.2 of the Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance.
o Due to the presence of an SRP easement at this location, the
extent to which the developer will be allowed to improve this are is
unknown and, therefore, the stipulation contains the language “as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development
Department.
x Stipulation No. 5: To require all walls and fences within 30 feet and
oriented-to the canal right-of-way to have a maximum opaque height of
36 inches to promote interface between the project and the canal
amenity.




Page 338
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




10. Conceptual Elevations
The conceptual building elevations, pictured below, depict a four story
multifamily complex exhibiting modern design elements, multiple colors, building
articulation, shaded upper floor balconies, and a mix of ground floor frontage
treatments including stoops, doorwells, and storefronts.

Title: Conceptual Building Elevations




Source: Rich Barber Architects




Page 339
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




STUDIES AND POLICIES
11. Tree and Shade Master Plan:
The Tree and Shade Master Plan encourages treating the urban forest as
infrastructure to ensure the trees are an integral part of the City’s planning and
development process. Sidewalks on the street frontages should be detached
from the curbs to allow trees to be planted on both sides of the sidewalk to
provide thermal comfort for pedestrians and to reduce the urban heat island
effect.

The Walkable Urban Code contains landscape standards to provide enhanced
tree plantings with a focus on thermal comfort and the conceptual site plan
complies with code requirements.

To require tree shade be integrated into the project between the southern
building mass and the Grand Canal right-of-way, staff is recommending
Stipulation No. 3 requiring large canopy shade trees, placed 20 feet on center or
in equivalent groupings, and with a minimum caliper of 3-inches at installation;
the purpose of this stipulation is to promote thermal comfort for the amenity
areas and along the Grand Canal.

12. Complete Streets Guidelines:
In 2014, the City of Phoenix City Council adopted the Complete Streets Guiding
Principles. The principles are intended to promote improvements that provide an
accessible, safe, connected transportation system to include all modes, such as
bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and vehicles. The Walkable Urban Code contains
requirements for detached sidewalks with vegetative shade which will enhance
the thermal comfort and sense of security for pedestrians passing on adjacent
sidewalks.

Staff is recommending Stipulation No. 8 to require enhanced bicycle facilities on
the site including secure bicycle parking for residents, bicycle racks for guests,
and a publicly accessible bicycle repair station near the southern edge of the
site; the purpose of these stipulations is to complement 3rd Avenue which is
identified as the Phoenix Sonoran Bikeway and the Grand Canal multiuse trail
which provides regional trail connectivity.

13. Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan:
The Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan is a guide for creating a culture and
environment conducive to bicycling as a viable mode of transportation. The
proximity to high capacity transit underscores the importance of walking and
bicycling in this area.




Page 340
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




Recognizing the presence of the Grand Canal, the recently completed
Canalscape investments, the presence of the Phoenix Sonoran Bikeway, and
proximity to high capacity transit, staff is recommending Stipulation No. 8 which
requires secure bicycle parking for residents, bicycle parking for guests, and a
publicly accessible bicycle repair station.

14. Housing Phoenix:
In June 2020, the Phoenix City Council approved the Housing Phoenix Plan.
This Plan contains policy initiatives for the development and preservation of
housing with the vision of creating a stronger and more vibrant Phoenix through
increased housing options for residents at all income levels and family sizes.
Phoenix’s rapid population growth and housing underproduction has led to a
need for over 163,000 new housing units. Current shortages of housing supply
relative to demand are a primary reason why housing costs are increasing.

The proposed development supports the Plan’s goal of preserving or creating
50,000 housing units by 2030 by contributing to a variety housing types that will
address the supply shortage at a more rapid pace while using vacant or
underutilized land in a more sustainable fashion.

15. Zero Waste PHX:
The City of Phoenix is committed to its waste diversion efforts and has set a
goal to become a zero waste city, as part of the city’s overall 2050
Environmental Sustainability Goals. One of the ways Phoenix can achieve this
is to improve and expand its recycling and other waste diversion programs.
Section 716 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance establishes standards to
encourage the provision of recycling containers for multifamily, commercial and
mixed-use developments meeting certain criteria. The provision of recycling
containers was not addressed in the applicant’s submittals.

COMMUNITY CORRESONDENCE
16. As of the writing of this report, one letter of opposition was received detailing
concerns relating to scale, privacy, traffic, the abundance of multifamily, and the
design compatibility with the historic district.

INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
17. The Fire Department commented that the site plan must comply with the
Phoenix Fire Code and further indicated there are no problems anticipated with
the case. Further, the Department commented that they do not know the water
supply at this site and noted that additional water supply may be required to
meet the required fire flow per the Phoenix Fire Code.




Page 341
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




18. The Public Works Department, Floodplain Management Division determined the
site is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) called Zone A, on panel 1740 L of
the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) dated October 16, 2013. The Public
Works Department provided Stipulation No. 10 to require the applicant follow
and document all necessary processes and improvements.

19. The Street Transportation Department provided Stipulation Nos. 6, 7, and 9 to
require traffic calming at vehicular driveways, two pedestrian connections to the
Grand Canal trail, and their standard stipulation regarding the applicant being
responsible for construction of adjacent streets, respectively.

The Street Transportation Department including the Pedestrian Safety
Coordinator further commented on the importance of enhanced pedestrian and
bicycle facilities including detached sidewalks, bicycle parking, a bicycle repair
station, and connections to the Grand Canal trail. These issues are addressed
in other stipulations or will be addressed through the application of the Walkable
Urban Code.

20. The Public Transit Department commented on the need for a robust system of
shaded pedestrian pathways with measures to delineate pedestrian crossings at
drive-aisles. These issues are addressed in other stipulations or will be
addressed through the application of the Walkable Urban Code.

OTHER
21. The site has not been identified as being archaeologically sensitive. However, in
the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, all
ground disturbing activities must cease within 33-feet of the discovery and the
time to properly assess the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 13.

22. Based on the proximity to Sky Harbor Airport, the Aviation Department is
requiring Stipulation Nos. 11 and 12 which require recorded documents to
disclose the existence of Sky Harbor Airport to future owners and residents, and
that an avigation easement be recorded.

23. Development and use of the site are subject to all applicable codes and
ordinances. Zoning approval does not negate other ordinance requirements.
Other formal actions such as, but not limited to, zoning adjustments and
abandonments may be required.




Page 342
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




Findings

1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of
Residential 15+ Dwelling Units Per Acre and the TOD Strategic Policy Framework
Minor Urban Center Place Type designation.

2. The development advances the vision and recommendations contained in the
Uptown Transit Oriented Development Plan and will support pedestrian oriented
development near the light rail and multiple urban bikeways.

3. The proposal will create additional housing options for the significant number of
residents in the Uptown TOD District.

Stipulations

1. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
incorporate Walkable Urban Code Frontage Types described in Section 1305
for a minimum 40 percent of the building face(s), as approved by the Planning
and Development Department. For the purpose applying the above provisions,
the above shall be treated as a Secondary Frontage with regard to glazing.

2. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
contain architectural embellishments, design detailing, and / or space
programming to activate and provide visual access onto the canal, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department. Examples of
appropriate enhancements may include textural changes, offsets, recesses,
variation in window size and location, overhang canopies, balconies with a
depth greater of than 3 feet, and amenities such as gathering spaces.

3. Between the southern mass of the building and the south property line (the
Grand Canal right-of-way), the developer shall plant minimum 3-inch caliper,
large canopy shade trees, at a minimum frequency of 25 feet on center or in
equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

4. The provisions of Section 1310.A.2 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance shall
apply to require shaded open space of which a minimum 50 percent shall be
situated adjacent to the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-way), as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.




Page 343
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




5. No solid perimeter wall greater than 36 inches in height shall be oriented to
and located within 30 feet of the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-
way), as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The developer shall provide traffic calming to slow vehicle traffic exiting the
property with specific regard to pedestrian safety on the public sidewalk, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. The developer shall provide a minimum of two direct and accessible pedestrian
connections from the amenity areas located south of the building mass to the
shared use path along the Grand Canal Trail, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The developer shall provide and maintain the following bicycle infrastructure as
described below and as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

a. A bicycle repair station (fix-it station) along the southern edge of the
site, visible, and accessible from the public sidewalk and / or the Grand
Canal Trail. The station shall include but not limited to: standard repair
tools affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair
stand which allows pedals and wheels to spin freely while adjusting the
bike.

b. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H.6.d
of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

c. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at
a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 spaces near
entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements of Section
1306.H. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

9. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

10. This parcel is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) called Zone A, on panel
1740 L of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) dated October 16, 2013. The
following requirements shall apply, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:




Page 344
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




a. The Architect/Engineer is required to show the floodplain boundary
limits on the Grading and Drainage plan and ensure that impacts to the
proposed facilities have been considered, following the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) Regulations (44 CFR Paragraph 60.3); this
includes, but not limited to provisions in the latest versions of the
Floodplain Ordinance of the Phoenix City Code.

b. A copy of the Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the
Floodplain Management section of Public Works Department for review
and approval of Floodplain requirements.

c. The developer shall provide a FEMA approved CLOMR-F or CLOMR
prior to issuance of a Grading and Drainage permit.

11. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

12. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix for the site, per the content and form prescribed by the City Attorney
prior to final site plan approval.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

Writer
Nick Klimek
January 20, 2021

Team Leader
Samantha Keating

Exhibits
Zoning sketch map
Aerial sketch map
Conceptual Site Plan and Elevations date stamped October 19, 2020 (2 pages)
Community Correspondence (4 pages)




Page 345
Staff Report: Z-56-20-4
January 20, 2021




North Central Employment Center Profile (2 pages)




Page 346
ELM ST



1ST AVE
C-2 H-R*
R-4 HP R-4A H-R * Z-60-85
Z-83-05
Z-9-89
P-1 * R-5 C-2
R-4 Z-341-83
HIGHLAND AVE

R-3
3RD AVE
R-3
R-3 PUD
Z-31-12
Z-83-05

COOLIDGE ST
R-3
R-5
R-5 *
Z-245-82 TOD District Canalscape
C-2
- UpTown
HAZELWOOD ST


R-4
CENTRAL AVE
HGT/WVR PKG/WVR
Central Avenue Z-175-87
Development Z-147-97
Standards
P-1 Transit C-2
MINNEZONA AVE Overlay District
(TOD-1)
C-2
R1-6 H-R
R1-6 P-2
2ND AVE
R-4 HP * HP
5TH AVE
Z-SP-16-72 Z-12-97 C-2
CAMPBELL AVE


R-4A*
Z-12-97
Z-102-98



I
Miles
Z-56-20 NORTHERN AVE


GLENDALE AVE

0.055 0.0275 0 0.055 BETHANY HOME RD
ALHAMBRA VILLAGE
CAMELBACK RD
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 4
43RD AVE 7ST AVE
7TH AVE
19TH AVE
35TH AVE
27TH AVE

I-17


APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
Trinsic Residential Group, Todd Gosselin
FROM:
R-3 ( 0.18 a.c.)
10/23/2020
R-5 ( 3.11 a.c.)
DATE:
APPLICATION NO.
Z-56-20 REVISION DATES:



GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
3.29 Acres QS 18-27 H-8 TO: WU Code T5:5 UT ( 3.29 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
R-3, R-5 2, 135 3, 162
WU Code T5:5 UT No Maximum N/A

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-56-20.mxd
Page 347
ELM ST



1ST AVE
C-2 H-R*
R-4 HP R-4A H-R * Z-60-85
Z-83-05
Z-9-89
P-1 * R-5 C-2
R-4 Z-341-83
HIGHLAND AVE

R-3
3RD AVE
R-3
R-3 PUD
Z-31-12
Z-83-05

COOLIDGE ST
R-3
R-5
R-5 *
Z-245-82 TOD District Canalscape
C-2
- UpTown
HAZELWOOD ST


R-4
CENTRAL AVE
HGT/WVR PKG/WVR
Central Avenue Z-175-87
Development Z-147-97
Standards
P-1 Transit C-2
MINNEZONA AVE Overlay District
(TOD-1)
C-2
R1-6 H-R
R1-6 P-2
2ND AVE
R-4 HP * HP
5TH AVE
Z-SP-16-72 Z-12-97 C-2
CAMPBELL AVE


R-4A*
Z-12-97
Z-102-98
Maricopa County Assessor's Office



I
Miles
Z-56-20 NORTHERN AVE


GLENDALE AVE

0.055 0.0275 0 0.055 BETHANY HOME RD
ALHAMBRA VILLAGE
CAMELBACK RD
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 4
43RD AVE 7ST AVE
7TH AVE
19TH AVE
35TH AVE
27TH AVE

I-17


APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
Trinsic Residential Group, Todd Gosselin
FROM:
R-3 ( 0.18 a.c.)
10/23/2020
R-5 ( 3.11 a.c.)
DATE:
APPLICATION NO.
Z-56-20 REVISION DATES:



GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
3.29 Acres QS 18-27 H-8 TO: WU Code T5:5 UT ( 3.29 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
R-3, R-5 2, 135 3, 162
WU Code T5:5 UT No Maximum N/A

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-56-20.mxd
Page 348
(;,67,1*6,1*/()$0,/< (;,67,1*6,1*/()$0,/< (;,67,1*6,1*/()$0,/< (;,67,1*6,1*/()$0,/< (;,67,1*6,1*/()$0,/<
/(*$/'(6&5,37,21 5 5 5 5 5
'(9(/230(17'$7$
7+(/$1'5()(55('72+(5(,1%(/2:,66,78$7(',17+(&2817< 6
2+( 2+( 2+(
2+( 2+( 2+( 2+( 352-(&7'(6&5,37,21
2)0$5,&23$67$7(2)$5,=21$$1',6'(6&5,%('$6)2//2:6 AURA
* * * * 75,16,&5(6,'(17,$/*5283,17(1'672'(9(/23$1(;&(37,21$/81,708/7,)$0,/<
3$5&(/12
5(6,'(17,$/ )255(17 3523(57</2&$7('217+(6287+($67&251(52)5'$9(18(
7+(:(67+$/)2)/27$1'7+(($67+$/)2)/2768%85%$1 6/*
&22/,'*(675((7 38%/,&52$':$< $1'&22/,'*(675((7
$&5(6$&&25',1*723/$72)5(&25',17+(2)),&(2)7+(
:: * * *
( * * : :
&2817<5(&25'(52)0$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$5(&25'(',1 : : * * *
°  °63


=21,1* '(16,7< $31
%22.2)0$363$*( 5&
35,0$5<)5217$*(/275(48,5(0(170,1
5&
: : : :
COOLIDGE
3529,'(' &855(175 352326(' % 3RD AVENUE AND COOLIDGE
(;&(377+(1257+)((7)25675((7385326(6 )2
2+( 6725()5217 67223 '225:(//   67223 '225:(// 352326(':87 '8$&5( 81,76
3$5&(/12 : : : 67223 '225:(// : : : : : : :
PHOENIX, AZ 85013
: : : : : :
7+(:(67+$/)2)/2768%85%$1$&5(6$&&25',1*723/$7
2)5(&25',17+(2)),&(2)7+(&2817<5(&25'(52)0$5,&23$                     /27$5($ $00(1,7,(6
    
&2817<$5,=21$5(&25'(',1%22.2)0$363$*( :  (
*8/<+='?  52:  *5266 6) DFUHV 322/63$),71(66
(;&(377+(1257+)((7)2552$' :
: :
:
3$5&(/12  1(7 6) DFUHV 5(&5($7,21&/8%5220%,.(
  
6725$*(
f Rich B
/2768%85%$1$&5(6$&&25',1*723/$72)5(&25',17+( 6ƒ  : 




2)),&(2)7+(&2817<5(&25'(52)0$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$
2+(  6ƒ  (
( (




( ( (
)2 )2 )2 )2 ( &216758&7,217<3( 6(7%$&.6 3(5&+$37(575$16(&77
eo
5(&25'(',1%22.2)0$363$*( 6
6ƒ  ( 
(;&(377+(5()5207+(1257+)((77+(5(2) )2  3$5.,1**$5$*( ,$ 35,0$5<)5217$*( &22/,'*(   0$;
(;&(377+(5()5207+(:(67)((77+(5(2)$1'   *$5$*(  (/(&  5(6,'(17,$/ 9$ 6(&21'$5<)5217$*( UG$9(   0$;
     ( %8,/',1*+(,*+7
(;&(377+(5()520$1<3$577+(5(2)/<,1*:,7+,17+(:(67  (175<(;,7 6,'(/27/,1( ($67   0,1
)((72)7+(6287+($6748$57(52)7+(1257+:(6748$57(52)  0$;)((7
Of
 3529,'(' )((7
6(&7,2172:16+,31257+5$1*(($672)7+(*,/$$1' : %8,/',1*$5($6
6$/75,9(5%$6($1'0(5,',$10$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$$6    
3529,'(',1'(('5(&25'(',1'2&.(73$*(
 0$; 81,70,; /(9(// %8,/',1*$5($ 6)

er Arch
2+(  /(9(// %8,/',1*$5($ 6)
3$5&(/12   67$,5
678',2 
6725<5(&/($6,1* 6(7%$&.
LLC fic
7+(6287+)((72)7+(1257+)((72)/2768%85%$1  67$,5  (/(& /(9(// %8,/',1*$5($ 6)
%('5220 
arb
$&5(6$&&25',1*723/$72)5(&25',17+(2)),&(2)7+( 81,76:,7+  /(9(// %8,/',1*$5($ 6)
&2817<5(&25'(52)0$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$5(&25'(',1 )2  %('5220 
 0$;  6725< 727$/ 6)
%22.2)0$363$*( 6(7%$&. 6725< 0(==$1,1($%29( 727$/81,76 
cture,
(;&(377+()2//2:,1*'(6&5,%('3$5&(/)2552$':$<  0(==$1,1(
  0(==$1,1(  *$5$*(%8,/',1*$5($6 ite
385326(6 ‡ $//81,766+$//%(2)$7/($67$16,
( /(9(// *$5$*($5($ 6)
7+$73$572)7+(6287+)((72)7+(1257+)((72)/27    7<3( % $&&(66,%,/,7<67$1'$5'6
2+( : /(9(// *$5$*($5($ 6)
68%85%$1$&5(6/<,1*:,7+,1)((72)7+(02180(17/,1(2)     ‡ 2)81,7672%($16,7<3( $  WorldHQ@ORBArch.com
7+,5'$9(18($66$,'02180(17/,1(,66+2:1217+(3/$72) $&&(66,%,/,7<67$1'$5'6 /(9(// *$5$*($5($ 6)
6287+3,(56213/$&(7+(3/$72):+,&+,65(&25'(',1%22.  /(9(// *$5$*($5($ 6)
(/(9 75$6+
2)0$363$*( *$5$*(/(9(// *$5$*($5($ 6)
 /27&29(5$*(
3$5&(/12
)2   67$,5 /(9(// *$5$*( *$5$*($5($ 6) 8 + * ' 8 ). /
7+(6287+)((72)7+(:(67)((72)7+(($67)((72) :+ :+
 $5($3529,'('  /9
1ƒ  ( 727$/ 6) - :/
, / )' : + ) :
7+(1257+)((72)/2768%85%$1$&5(6$1'7+(1257+ (/(9 8+
+8
6,7(1(7$5($  ) 
)((72)7+(6287+)((72)7+(:(67)((72)7+(($67 6725<5(6,'(17,$/ /2%%< 3(5&(173529,'(' 
2+(  
)((72)7+(1257+)((72)/2768%85%$1$&5(6 23(163$&( 

$&&25',1*723/$72)5(&25',17+(2)),&(2)7+(&2817< 35,0$5<)5217$*(5(48,5('0,1,080 5LFK%DUEHU
:  5(48,5(' 2)*5266$&5($*( 
5(&25'(52)0$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$5(&25'(',1%22.  3529,'('     
( *G Z 
2)0$363$*( 6(& K 
9O M 
   $5($3529,'(' T K J    
3$5&(/12 6(&21'$5<)5217$*(5(48,5('0,1,080 '8 
7+(1257+)((72)7+(:(67)((72)7+(($67)((72) (;,67,1* 9$1 &(17(5&2857<$5' 6) / @ 5 4  ;  9 '
'
3529,'('   
7+(1257+)((72)/2768%85%$1$&5(6$&&25',1*72 )2 6287+&2857<$5' 6) +^VOXKY°°
6,1*/(
3/$72)5(&25',17+(2)),&(2)7+(&2817<5(&25'(52)     727$/ 6)
)$0,/< 2+(
0$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$5(&25'(',1%22.2)0$363$*( 6,7(*5266$5($ 
5
 3$5.,1* 3(5&(173529,'(' 6)6)
(;&(37,1*7+(5()5207+$73257,212)7+(/$1'&219(<('72  6(6 (;,67,1* 
:$7(5
7+(&,7<2)3+2(1,;$081,&,3$/&25325$7,21025( )($785( 5 5(48,5('
:
 0$,17(1$1&(
3$57,&8/$5/<'(6&5,%(',148,7&/$,0'(('5(&25'(' 63$&(63(5678',2 [ 
129(0%(5$62)2)),&,$/5(&25'6   63$&(63(5 %(' [  */$=,1*

3$5&(/12 ),5( 727$/5(48,5(' 36
3,7 (
 
7+(($67)((72)7+(1257+)((72)/2768%85%$1 2+(  5(485,('3(57$%/(75$16(&77
$&5(6$&&25',1*723/$72)5(&25',17+(2)),&(2)7+( )2 5$0383 5('8&7,21
   0,1,080*5281')/225
&2817<5(&25'(52)0$5,&23$&2817<$5,=21$5(&25'(',1 1ƒ  (  0$;   5('8&7,21)25352;,0,7<72/,*+75$,/ )5217$*(  ;  6)
%22.2)0$363$*(  6(7%$&. 67$7,21 
*/$=,1* 6)
(;&(377+(1257+)((77+(5(2) 36[ 5(48,5('63$&(6
            

3529,'('
3529,'('
&,7<2)3+2(1,;6,7(3/$1127(6   6)6) 
:
UG$9(18( 38%/,&52$':$<
/2$',1* 35263(&7,9(5(6,'(17 
=21(

 'HYHORSPHQWDQGXVHRIWKLVVLWHZLOOFRQIRUPZLWKDOODSSOLFDEOHFRGHV   5(6,'(17*$5$*(  ),5(635,1./(56
 (/(9
DQGRUGLQDQFHV 2+(   6ƒ  : 727$/3529,'(' 
)2 6725<5(6,'(17,$/
 $OOQHZRUUHORFDWHGXWLOLWLHVZLOOEHSODFHGXQGHUJURXQG 1ƒ  : 
(;,67,1* 1)3$
 ³6WUXFWXUHVDQGODQGVFDSLQJZLWKLQDWULDQJOHPHDVXUHGEDFN¶ IURP 6,1*/(
*$5$*(   +(,*+7 $&&(66,%/(3$5.,1* ,1&/8'(',1&2817
WKHSURSHUW\OLQHDQG¶ DORQJWKHSURSHUW\OLQHRQHDFKVLGHRIWKH )$0,/<  5(48,5('  
GULYHZD\VHQWUDQFHVZLOOEHPDLQWDLQHGDWDPD[LPXPKHLJKWRI¶´
%8,/',1*)5217$*((175<
5 
 6WUXFWXUHVDQGODQGVFDSLQJZLWKLQDWULDQJOHPHDVXULQJ¶ [¶ DORQJ 6(&21'$5<)5217$*(/275(48,5(0(170,1,080
 *$5$*(/ 36 9$1$&&(6,%/( 5(48,5(0(176
WKHSURSHUW\OLQHVZLOOEHPDLQWDLQHGDWDPD[LPXPKHLJKWRI¶ *$5$*(/ 36
 $Q\OLJKWLQJZLOOEHSODFHGVRDVWRGLUHFWOLJKWDZD\IURPDGMDFHQW :   *$5$*(/ 36 5(48,5(' 75$16(&77
6ƒ  ( 35,0$5<%8,/',1*)5217$*(
UHVLGHQWLDOGLVWULFWVDQGZLOOQRWH[FHHGRQHIRRWFDQGOHDWWKHSURSHUW\  5$0383
OLQH1RQRLVHRGRURUYLEUDWLRQZLOOEHHPLWWHGDWDQ\OHYHOH[FHHGLQJ 3529,'(' 36 9$1$&&(6,%/( 6(&21'$5<%8,/',1*)5217$*(
6725<
WKHJHQHUDOOHYHORIQRLVHRGRURUYLEUDWLRQHPLWWHGE\XVHVLQWKHDUHD
Page 349
:
2+( :
RXWVLGHRIWKHVLWH )2  0(==$1,1(
 2ZQHUVRISURSHUW\DGMDFHQWWRSXEOLFULJKWVRIZD\ZLOOKDYHWKH .(<127(6
UHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUPDLQWDLQLQJDOOODQGVFDSLQJORFDWHGZLWKLQWKHULJKWVRI 
3529,'('
:
  
ZD\LQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKDSSURYHGSODQV  
 $OOURRIWRSHTXLSPHQWDQGVDWHOOLWHGLVKHVVKDOOEHVFUHHQHGWRWKH  $&&(66,%/(*$5$*(63$&( [ 

KHLJKWRIWKHWDOOHVWHTXLSPHQW   9(+,&8/$56/,',1**$7(
)2
 $OOVHUYLFHDUHDVVKDOOEHVFUHHQHGWRFRQFHDOWUDVKFRQWDLQHUVORDGLQJ   6,'(:$/.6((/$1'6&$3(
GRFNVWUDQVIRUPHUVEDFNIORZSUHYHQWHUVDQGRWKHUPHFKDQLFDORU     6,'(:$/.6((/$1'6&$3(
HOHFWULFDOHTXLSPHQWIURPH\HOHYHODGMDFHQWWRDOOSXEOLFVWUHHWV 52: (/(9
)2   [ 6,*+79,6,%,/,7<75,$1*/(
/2%%<
67223 '225:(//
 %DUEHGUD]RURUFRQFHUWLQDZLUH RUVLPLODU VKDOOQRWEHXVHGRQWKLV 67$,5
   322/ 9$1 9$1   [ 6,*+79,6,%,/,7<75,$1*/(
VLWHZKHUHYLVLEOHIURPSXEOLFVWUHHWVRUDGMDFHQWUHVLGHQWLDODUHDV &29(5(' (48,30(17
+( 3$9,/,21 (/(9
  
 $OOVLJQDJHUHTXLUHVVHSDUDWHUHYLHZVDSSURYDOVDQGSHUPLWV1R )2  %8,/',1*(175<(;,7

VLJQVDUHDSSURYHGSHUWKLVSODQ :  (;7(1'('3$7,2672236
 *DWHVDUHWRUHPDLQRSHQRUDUHWRRSHQDXWRPDWLFDOO\EHWZHHQWKH    (175<67$,5
%%4
KRXUVRIBBBBBBDQGBBBBBB )2        
   *$5$*((175<$7*5281'/(9(/:,7+5(6,'(17,$/81,76/(9(/6
3OHDVHFRQVLGHUSODFLQJWKHIROORZLQJQRWH VLJQHGDQGGDWHG RQWKHVLWH
SODQWRDXWKRUL]HPLQRUDPHQGPHQWWRWKHSODQLQWKHIXWXUH 6($7:$//  75$6++2/',1*5220)8//<6&5((1('$7*5281'/(9(/:,7+5(6,'(17,$/
)2 81,76/(9(/6((62/,':$67(1$55$7,9(7+,66+((7
,FRQVHQWWRWKHUHSURGXFWLRQRIWKLVVLWHSODQSURYLGHGWKDWLI *$0(/$:1  75$6+&203$&725

PRGLILFDWLRQVDUHPDGHWKHSURIHVVLRQDOVZKRPDNHVXFKFKDQJHV )2
 6($7:$//  9(+,&8/$57851$55281'63$&(
DVVXPHIXOOUHVSRQVLELOLW\DQGOLDELOLW\IRUWKHPRGLILHGSRUWLRQVRIWKH  0(&+$1,&$/9(17,/$7,216+$)7
),5(
SODQ 3,7
2+(   *8/<+='?   [ /2$',1*=21(21(/2$',1*%$<5(48,5('3(5:8&2'(7$%/(
)2 :
 
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
6,*1$785(2)&23<5,*+72:1(5'$7(  (;+,67,1*),5(+<'5$17
)2
6725<
5LFK%DUEHU   
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 0(==$1,1(
35,17('1$0(2)&23<5,*+72:1(5
2+(
),5(3/$&(



62/,':$67(127(6 1ƒ  : 
:
&2857<$5'
62/,':$67(1$55$7,9(
75$6+&+87(6$5(/2&$7(',17+(3$5.,1**$5$*(21$//   
)/2256$1'$1$'',7,21$/&+87(/2&$7('217+(:(676,'( 67$,5
  6<17+(7,&
2)%8,/',1* %%4 /$:1

6725<),71(66 6725< 5(9,6,21668%0,77$/6
75$6+7(50,1$7,2152206$5(/2&$7(',13$5.,1**$5$*(
$7*5$'(/(9(/$1'21:(676,'(2)%8,/',1*:+(5(75$6+ 81,76:,7+ 0(==$1,1( '$7( '(6&5,37,21
)2 )2 )2 )2 )2 )2 )2 )2




,6&203$&7('$1'3/$&(',172<'%,1675$6+%,16$5( 0(==$1,1($%29( 75/( .,9$352-(&7
7$.(172+2/',1*5220/2&$7('$7*5$'(/(9(/211257+ 67$,5 
6(  : 6'(9 
6,'(2)*$5$*(+2/',1*5220,6&203/(7(/<(1&/26('$1' (;
  )$&7 
/,*+7
  / 
 6ƒ 
6&5((1(':,7+*$7(6 6(((/(9$7,216 2175$6+3,&.83  0$;  (17 3$33

'$<6%,16$5(7$.(1287%<67$))723529,'('67$*,1*$5($ 2+( 6(7%$&. ($60 46
)25&2//(&7,21<'5(&<&/(%,1:,//%(3529,'(',1 %(1&+
237,21$/
 
/$:1

3257$/ 
*$5$*($&&(66,%/(72$//5(6,'(1765(&<&/(%,1:,//%(
*$0(/$:1
%.
52//('287213,&.83'$<7267$*,1*$5($ ),71(66/$:1
  6725<
5(48,5('62/,':$67(&$3$&,7< %,.(
5(3$,5 0(==$1,1( %%4
),5(3,7 %(1&+
 0,1,75$6+&203$&7256$5(/2&$7(',17+(3$5.,1* &2857<$5' 6($7:$//

*$5$*(/(9(/($&+&203$&725&203$&7675$6+,172<' 2+( 5'$9(18(
%,.( :  7+$9(18(
%,16 /$:1
5$&.6
&(175$/$9(18(
  &22/,'*(675((7
 0,1,75$6+&203$&725,6/2&$7('21/(9(/ :(676,'( 6ƒ 

2)%8,/',1* &203$&725&203$&7675$6+,172<'%,16 6,7(
1(,*+%25+22' (;
&8%,&<$5'63(581,7; &<6(59,&('7:,&( 3$5.3$7,2 /,*+7

3(5:((.  &<&203$&7,212) &<3(5
%(1&+ %,.(
6(59,&(7:,&(3(5:((. 5$&.6 $1$/
5$03
&<3(56(59,&(&<3(5%,1 0,12)%,16,1+2/',1* *5$1'& DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2020 ORB #: 20-212
5220
$6,1*/(&<5(&<&/(%,1$5(/2&$7(',1*$5$*(1($50$,1 $60(17 &$03%(//$9(18(




(175<6(59,&(:,//%(%$6('2186($1'%8,/',1* /$:1
 ( 
(: $/.
2&&83$1&<  *  6,'
%.  : 7,1 $/
(;
ƒ (;,6 '&$1
/,*+7
6  *5$1
( 
2+
2+(

2+
(
35(/,0,1$5<6,7(3/$1    
9,&,1,7<0$3
A1.10
 6&$/(   
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
127726&$/(
(/3° °'[XG°)UUROJMKE'[XG°)UUROJMKX\Z
Page 350
&LW\RI3KRHQL[(PSOR\PHQW&HQWHU3UR´OH

NORTH CENTRAL
The North Central
employment center Labor Force Accessibility and Skills
offers an exceptional The North Central employment center offers excellent access to a large portion
of the metro area’s 1.7 million workers. Approximately 770,000 young, well-educated
location in one of the workers reside within a 30 minute drive time.1 High concentrations of service and
FLW\­VSUHPLHURI´FH health care workers live within 10 to 20 minutes. In addition, about 16 percent of the
corridors. workforce living within a 20 minute drive time is made up of executives, managers
and technical professionals.2
Projected growth for this area will result in close to 170,000 new residents within
a 30 minute drive time by 2020, providing a continually expanding labor pool.3
This employment
center extends from 1, 2, 3 Claritas, 2015.
McDowell Road north
to Camelback Road
between Seventh
Street and Seventh Employment by Occupation
Avenue. The North Workforce 10 Min. Drive 20 Min. Drive 30 Min. Drive
Central area includes Number % Number % Number %
KLJKULVHRI´FHDQG
Management 7,416 7 57,595 8 131,498 9
residential buildings
Engineering & Science 2,224 2 16,777 2 36,046 3
surrounded by
historic single family Healthcare & Education 11,089 10 82,493 11 170,387 12
neighborhoods, parks Service 16,173 15 109,119 15 195,911 14
and cultural amenities. Sales 10,112 9 81,075 11 167,369 12
Clerical & Admin. Support 15,143 14 117,524 16 219,346 16
Construction 8,978 8 48,001 6 71,611 5
Production 6,210 6 39,874 5 64,441 5
Trans./Material Mover 6,373 6 46,614 6 76,283 5
Total 83,718 599,072 1,132,892
Source: Claritas, 2015.




Commute Shed
Commuters who travel to
Employment Corridor per
Square Mile
4 to 10
10 to 25
25 to 50
More than 50
• Access to a large executive Phoenix North Central Job Center
and professional workforce Phoenix North Central Job
Center Catchment Area

• Advanced
telecommunications
infrastructure

• /DUJHLQYHQWRU\RIRI´FH
space

• Competitive lease rates
Source: Maricopa Association of
• Superior accessibility to Governments, TRP Reduction Database,
NH\EXVLQHVVDQG´QDQFLDO 2013
services
Equal Opportunity Employer/Program. Auxiliary Aids and services are available upon request to individuals with
disabilities. Products and services made available through Federal Funding provided by the Workforce Investment Act.
Page 351
Camelback Rd.
Metro Light Rail
Existing and Planned
Sites and Buildings Development
The North Central employment center offers 1. Century Link Tower
a large inventory of office and commercial 586,403 sq. ft.


Central Ave.
space mixed with a variety of hotel and Office

7th Ave.
Steele Indian
residential developments. From high-rise office
7th St.
2. Viad Tower Phase II School Park
buildings and condominiums to palm tree-lined 478,488 sq. ft.
streets of historic single-family neighborhoods, Office - Proposed
diversity enhances the appeal of this 3. Phoenix Corporate Tower
445,811 sq. ft.
conveniently located area. Indian School Rd.
Office
The area has about 14.5 million square feet 4. Phoenix Plaza Tower II
of existing office space in close proximity to 419,453 sq. ft.
downtown. For companies that require build-to- Office
suit space, there are prime commercial high-rise 5. Phoenix Plaza Tower I
418,613 sq. ft. 8
parcels available.4 Osborn Rd.
The map to the right highlights the type Office
of community real estate in the North Central 6. Younan Central Plaza
405,693
area. Our team can provide more detail, custom 3
Office
information based on your requirements. 7. 2800 Tower 4
364,533 sq. ft. 5 1
Thomas Rd.
4 CoStar Realty Information Inc., 2015 Office
8. 3550 Tower 7
287,269 sq. ft.
Connectivity Office
9. Park Central - Bldg 7
The North Central employment center 224,953 sq. ft.
features modern, reliable telecommunications Office
10. Security Title Plaza
infrastructure that is supported by multiple
219,032 sq. ft.
providers. These providers are able to offer Office 2
specialized capabilities such as complete digital
infrastructure, T-1 (DS1) lines, T-3 (DS3) lines, McDowell Rd.
Source: CoStar Realty Information Inc., 2015
self-healing fiber ring architecture and high-
speed data communications. Local exchange
carriers with service in the North Central area Amenities and Attractions
include CenturyLink and Cox Communications.
The exciting Phoenix Arts District includes the Phoenix Art Museum
and Theater, the Playhouse on the Park and the internationally renowned
Infrastracture Heard Museum of Native American Art. Steele Indian School Park, located
Abundant and reliable power sources at the northeast corner of Central Avenue and Indian School Road, features
are available from a highly advanced network an expansive 15-acre entry garden, several historical buildings depicting the
system that provides redundant feeds from history of Phoenix Indian School, an amphitheater with seating for 1,500, a
multiple sub-stations. 2.5-acre bird-shaped lake and waterfall and a 15-acre neighborhood park.
The North Central employment center enjoys Located in the heart of the North Central employment center, Park Central
easy access to a modern network of urban is a 500,000 square foot mixed-use redevelopment featuring offices, retail,
freeways and arterial streets. This employment restaurants and business-oriented hotels. In addition, there are a number
center has excellent transit service and is of new luxury apartment developments in the area that provide a variety
located along the METRO light rail transit line of housing options for workers and support continued office and retail
that connects the area to downtown Phoenix, development.
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and
surrounding cities. Major Area Employers
For businesses that require convenient
air access, Phoenix Sky Harbor International CenturyLink PricewaterhouseCoopers
Telecommunications Accounting and Management Consulting
Airport is located just 15 minutes away. The Deloitte LLP Dignity Health
airport is one of the busiest in the U.S. based Accounting and Management Consulting Hospital Administration
on passenger traffic and offers more than 830 Fennemore Craig IBM Corporation
Law Firm Administrative Operations
daily non-stop flights to nearly 80 domestic
SCF Arizona U-Haul International
destinations and 13 international destinations.5 Direct Property and Casuality Insurance - HQ Leasing Services - Corp. HQ
Viad Corporation Xerox Corporation
5 Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, 2015. Business Services - HQ Copiers and Office Products
BMO Harris Bank
Banking and Financial Services

Source: Maricopa Association of Governments, 2013



PHOENIX IS DESIGNED City of Phoenix
Community and Economic Development Department


TO WORK. 200 W. Washington St., 20th Floor | Phoenix, AZ 85003
www.phoenix.gov/econdev | 602-262-5040

Page 352
From: Adam Ghiz
To: Nick Klimek
Cc: ben@witheymorris.com
Subject: Re: Z-56-20 (3rd Avenue and Coolidge)
Date: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 12:07:07 PM


One Additional concern.

The large grassy area on the corner of 3rd and Coolidge has been used for years by the
neighborhood as a makeshift park. Families have used this area for recreation with their
children and pets. It provides for a grassy green area, in an otherwise paved jungle. You will
be taking this away from all residents, and instead of providing more greenery, will be adding
more concrete.

~Adam


On Nov 3, 2020, at 11:51 AM, Adam Ghiz wrote:


Here are my concerns for this project:

1. 56ft building height allowed by T5:5
2. 10 ft setback from current sidewalk, this in combination of the height will
basically provide for an entire block of apartments from the canal to Coolidge
looking directly over my fence and into my yard and house.
3. Noise, this is an extremely quiet section and adding an additional 218 housing
units will greatly increase the noise factor of the neighborhood.
4. Traffic. Hazelwood turns into 3rd ave and as a result, there is a very low traffic
density. Even with the the garage entry on Coolidge, traffic is going to greatly
increase on these streets and most likely all street parking with cease to exist.
5. Saturation. There are already 5 or 6 (possibly even more) high density
apartment complexes in this immediate area. Adding yet another complex will
adversely and disproportionately affect this neighborhood vs other
neighborhoods.
6. Historic district. This complex is almost surrounded on the 3rd ave and
Coolidge street sections by the Pierson Place Historic district. Constructing this
large complex when surrounded by a historic district diminishes the intention of
having a historic district. The proposed elevations are quoted as “blending in” yet
it looks like every other apartment complex built.

This project adversely affects my property disproportionately as I am on the
corner of 3rd and Hazelwood and this apartment complex will be towering over
my house, and on the entire east side of my property I will now stare at 56ft of
apartment building.

~Adam


On Nov 3, 2020, at 11:18 AM, Nick Klimek
wrote:


Page 353
Good morning, Adam –

I apologize but I believe I failed to answer one of your primary questions,
expressed via Maura, regarding whether the property is currently
approved for development. The answer is both yes and no… please allow
me to explain.

The property is currently zoned R-5 which generally means they could
build to a height of 48 feet.

However, the applicant has elected to pursue additional zoning
entitlement under the Walkable Urban Code. The process will take 4-6
months and include 3 public hearings and a neighborhood meeting.
During this process, the site plan may change and evolve in response to
community concerns and priorities. I recommend putting your concerns in
writing and sending them over to me. I also suggest reaching out to the
applicant’s representative, Ben Tate, to express yours concerns early on.

In the coming weeks, I will be reviewing the proposal in greater detail.

Kind regards,

Nick



Nick Klimek, AICP
Village Planner
Office: 602-534-7696
E-mail: nick.klimek@phoenix.gov

Planning & Development Department
200 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Mission: Planning, Development and Preservation for a Better
Phoenix

***I am currently working remotely on a rotational schedule, but will be
checking voicemails multiple times per day. Please feel free to leave me a
voice message or email me for a more timely response. Thank you.***




From: Adam Ghiz
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 10:45 AM
To: Nick Klimek



Page 354
Subject: Re: Z-56-20 (3rd Avenue and Coolidge)

Thanks for the response. So I am in the house directly across from this and
will be affected greatly as most of my exposure is to the east where the
current donor network building is. This picture is what I see from most of
my house. I estimate that these trees are approximately 30ft tall and
from what I have seen, it looks like the building will be 56ft tall. Also,
correct me if I am wrong, but the building will only be setback 10 ft from
the current sidewalk?

If this is the case, how can I expect any modicum of privacy? Not to
mention, that all I will be able to see from my windows will now be
building.

How does a project this large get approved so close to a historic
residential neighborhood? It destroys any point in trying to preserve the
original feel of the neighborhood.

I am greatly distressed by this news and also would like to know if there is
an estimated time when construction will begin.

Thanks,
Adam



On Nov 3, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Nick Klimek
wrote:


Good morning, Mr. Ghiz –

My name is Nick Klimek and I am the Alhambra Village
Planner. I received your contact information from Maura
Jackson from our Historic Preservation Office. Please feel
free to send any written comments to me and I will ensure
they be provided to the applicant and included with the staff
report as the request is processed; in your email, please
reference the case number Z-56-20.

If you would like to discuss, please feel free to call me at the
below number but please note that the request is very new
so I may be light on exact details regarding the site plan.

Kind regards,




Page 355
Nick



Nick Klimek, AICP
Village Planner
Office: 602-534-7696
E-mail: nick.klimek@phoenix.gov

Planning & Development
Department
200 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Mission: Planning, Development and Preservation
for a Better Phoenix

***I am currently working remotely on a rotational schedule,
but will be checking voicemails multiple times per day.
Please feel free to leave me a voice message or email me
for a more timely response. Thank you.***




Page 356
Attachment C




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-56-20-4

Date of VPC Meeting January 26, 2021

Request From R-3 and R-5
Request To WU Code T5:5 UT
Proposed Use Multifamily Residential

Location Southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street

VPC Recommendation Approve per staff recommendation

VPC Vote 15-1-0, motion passes with Farina, Ammon, Ender,
Fitzgerald, Adams, Keyser, Kreitor, LeBlanc, Sanchez,
Jones, Solorio, McCabe, Bryck, Vice Chair Williams, and
Chair Shore in favor; Smith in dissent; and none in
abstention.

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

One speaker card was received on this item from an individual wishing to speak
in opposition to the request.

During this item, Becker was unavailable by audio or video and did not vote on
the item. For the purpose of the vote, he is considered absent reducing the
quorum to 16 members (10 being needed for a quorum).

STAFF PRESENTATION

Klimek, staff, provided an overview of the site, the request, the proposal, and the
recommendation. Located at the southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge
Street, the site is currently occupied by an office complex, and the request is to
rezone the property from R-3 and R-5 to the Walkable Urban Code Transect 5:5
Uptown to allow for multifamily redevelopment. The site is within 0.25 miles of
light rail, multiple schools, and immediately adjacent to both the Phoenix Sonoran
Bikeway (3rd Avenue) and the Grand Canal which position the property at the
junction of two major bicycle routes.

The request is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of
Residential 15+ dwelling units per acre and with the Transit Oriented



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 357
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021

Development Strategic Policy Framework which is identified as supporting
intensity of 2 to 5 stories and up to 7 when certain bonus criteria are met.
Further, the proposal will advance the Canalscape Catalyst Project identified in
the Uptown Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan.

The proposal for a 4 story multifamily complex with 218 units includes shaded
and detached sidewalks along 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street and “frontage
types” to activate the streetscape environment. The elevations and conceptual
site plan depict measures to engage and activate the Grand Canal including
frontage types oriented to the canal, plazas and amenities between the building
and the canal, and low walls designed to embrace the waterfront.

Staff is recommending approval, subject to 13 stipulations, on the basis of the
request being consistent and aligned with the recommendations of the Phoenix
General Plan, the TOD Strategic Policy Framework, the Uptown TOD Policy
Plan, and the Housing Phoenix Plan.

Stipulation Nos. 1 – 5 seek to promote a strong interface with the Grand Canal.
Stipulations Nos. 6 – 8 seek to promote a safe and comfortable environment for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Stipulation Nos. 9 – 13 include standard language
pertaining to street improvements, removing the site from the special flood
hazard area, aviation disclosures, and archaeology.

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Jason Morris, of Withey Morris, introduced himself, his client, the project, and
the change happening in this area. Trinsic Residential has done many projects
throughout the region and their investment model is to hold their properties long
term due, in large part to their ownership structure which includes the Texas
Teachers’ Retirement Fund.

The property is currently an office complex but its tenant, the Donor Network of
Arizona, has relocated to Tempe. There is a concentration of multifamily
development here because of the urban core, because of the transit overlay, and
because of the transportation patterns in the area. The developer views this
location as an excellent opportunity for multi-modal transportation with the
adjacency to the Grand Canal, the Phoenix Sonoran Bikeway, and the light rail
along Central Avenue. Unlike the nearby multifamily residential projects, these
projects did not embrace the canal nor their street frontages. The subject site
currently is entitled for 4 story multifamily development, the developer is seeking
to transition this entitlement to the Walkable Urban Code to yield a better and
more context-appropriate project.

Multiple city adopted policies call for this level of intensity at this location
including the General Plan, the Transit Oriented Strategic Policy Framework, and
the Uptown Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan. The location is ideal to



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 358
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021

leverage the city’s investment in the light rail and in the Canalscape
improvements and the project is designed to embrace these policies and
investments.

The Walkable Urban Code is a newer zoning category that is much more
restrictive or directive in terms of the types of things that should be done in the
project while also being more flexible in other ways. He then provided an
overview of the site plan and renderings focusing on the street environment, the
canal interface designed to create more eyes and interaction onto this waterfront,
and the building architecture which includes offsets, recesses, and a variety of
materials to break up the mass of the building. The project is designed with units
wrapped around the parking structure which will not be visible from the perimeter.

Through the neighborhood outreach efforts which included an additional meeting
with the Pierson Place Historic Neighborhood, stakeholders raised a series of
concerns and the plan responds to these as follows:
• On Street Parking. Parking is provided in excess to the amount required
by code. To reduce the likelihood of street parking, the project was
designed to make street parking less convenient than garage parking for
future tenants. As a buy-hold builder, tenant retention is important to the
ownership group they are therefore conscious that parking must be
sufficient. Further, the applicant has agreed to work with the city to prohibit
on street parking along the 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street frontages.
• Traffic. The development is served by a single-point of vehicular access
located at the far northeast corner of the site to reduce westbound traffic
through the neighborhood and to reduce vehicle conflicts with the
bikeway.
• Height. The site is currently permitted to build 48 feet and four stories and
the request for 56 feet and four stories is intended to allow for higher
ceiling heights. The increase in height from 48 to 56 feet will be
imperceptible from ground level and produce a significantly better project.
• Publicly Accessible Open Space. The plan includes a public amenity area
in the southwest corner of the site with a bicycle fix-it station, bike racks,
seating, and shade. The plan also includes publicly accessible lawn areas
and seating along the canal frontage with lush landscaping and a
pedestrian connection into the project.
• Trash Collection. Waste collection will be provided by a private contractor
with all dumpsters located within the parking structure which will reduce
noise.

He concluded by reiterating that the site is permitted for high density multifamily
currently, how the project embraces alternative transportation as an amenity in a
manner consistent with city policy and investments, and will create an enhanced
canalscape including an active interface with publicly accessible open space and
amenities.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 359
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Solorio: Does the project include affordable units?
• Morris: No, while there is a need in the region, there is currently no
affordable housing program which would provide an even approach. If
such a program were in place, the applicant would participate.

Adams: What are the price-points for units, the size of units, and the projected
impact on nearby property values?
• Morris: The units will rent from $1,300 – $2,000. The project includes a
mix of unit sizes. Trinsic has studied the issue of property values in the
vicinity of their projects and has found that their projects produce an
increase in values beyond the increase projected by the market baseline.
He added that this trend is not universal for all multifamily projects but
because Trinsic is in it for the long-haul, their projects are well-designed,
well-managed, and well-maintained long term.
• Adams: Expressed concern over how the landscaping and architectural
design elements will likely be unsuccessful in breaking up the mass of the
building in reality.

Smith: Is this a 4 or 5 story building, is there an opportunity to reduce the height
of the building, and are they concerned about security with the site being so open
to the canal? She added concern that parking does not seem sufficient and noted
that it will likely spill over into the neighborhood.
• Morris: There will be a limited number of premium units that have an
interior staircase to a mezzanine level; that the applicant recognizes that
parking is an important consideration for long-term tenant retention and
has therefore studied the topic extensively; and that, while the project
does place more eyes on the canal, security measures include a perimeter
fence, access controlled gates, and all perimeter doors to the building
being locked.

The site is zoned for high-intensity multifamily, identified for high-intensity
residential in the General Plan, located nearly adjacent to the light rail, and
along two major alternative-transportation routes and the proposal
embraces these concepts utilizing the Walkable Urban Code which is
recommended for these types of circumstances. Change can be
challenging especially when it comes from “left field” but all publicly
accessible policy points to this being an area to accommodate growth. He
concluded this point by sharing that there are no single-family, owner
occupied homes north of Coolidge, and that the applicant has worked
extensively with owners west of the subject site to resolve concerns.

The development will include security measures such as a perimeter
fence, access-controlled gates, and all perimeter doors to the building
being locked.



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 360
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021



Ammon: What improvements are proposed at the 3rd Avenue bridge over the
canal, do the ground floor units have direct street access, is open space being
provided beyond code requirements, and does the project include photovoltaic
energy productions?
• Morris: There will be an open masonry portal that will further enhance and
complement the canalscape improvements. The ground floor units along
3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street have stoop and doorwell frontages and
the lobby will be a storefront. The project will have 12 percent open space
compared to the 5 percent required by code. To reduce the potential for
overflow parking and interference with the bikeway, they will work with the
city to prohibit on street parking.
• Gosselink: Todd Gosselink introduced himself as the developer and
explained that they are proud to include a photovoltaic array on the
building. One of their earlier projects, Aura Watermark, on the north shore
of Tempe Town Lake included a $150,000 solar array and was the first
market-rate, multifamily project, in Arizona to include solar energy. They
currently have a project at Central Avenue and Indianola Avenue with a
$750,000 solar array. Trinsic recognizes the value of solar as long term
investors and this project will have a $750,000 – $1,000,000 solar array on
the rooftop in addition to other efficiency enhancements.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Frank Paoletti introduced himself and state that he lives on Coolidge Street west
of the subject site and has livered there for 22 years and knew some of the
original owners. He expressed concerns related to parking, safety, and traffic
noting that Coolidge does not have sidewalks west of 3rd Avenue. He asked
whether the streets, sewers, and other infrastructure can accommodate another
218 units and 436 cars daily.

APPLICANT RESPONSE

Morris responded that traffic and on street parking had been early concerns from
the neighborhood and the plan had been revised to address these issues. He
added that code could have required less parking but, given its importance to
retaining tenants, the plan includes structured parking in excess of that required
by code. Regarding traffic, the site is zoned for high-intensity development and is
developed as an office complex, and therefore, the proposed multifamily complex
will replace traffic and infrastructure impacts already present on the site.

FLOOR/PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED: DISCUSSION, MOTION AND VOTE

Motion
Bryck moved to approve the request per staff recommendation. McCabe
seconded the motion.



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 361
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021

VOTE: 15-1-0, motion passes with Farina, Ammon, Ender, Fitzgerald,
Adams, Keyser, Kreitor, LeBlanc, Sanchez, Jones, Solorio, McCabe,
Bryck, Vice Chair Williams, and Chair Shore in favor; Smith in dissent; and
none in abstention.

VPC RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS

1. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
incorporate Walkable Urban Code Frontage Types described in Section 1305
for a minimum 40 percent of the building face(s), as approved by the Planning
and Development Department. For the purpose applying the above provisions,
the above shall be treated as a Secondary Frontage with regard to glazing.

2. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
contain architectural embellishments, design detailing, and / or space
programming to activate and provide visual access onto the canal, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department. Examples of
appropriate enhancements may include textural changes, offsets, recesses,
variation in window size and location, overhang canopies, balconies with a
depth greater of than 3 feet, and amenities such as gathering spaces.

3. Between the southern mass of the building and the south property line (the
Grand Canal right-of-way), the developer shall plant minimum 3-inch caliper,
large canopy shade trees, at a minimum frequency of 25 feet on center or in
equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

4. The provisions of Section 1310.A.2 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance shall
apply to require shaded open space of which a minimum 50 percent shall be
situated adjacent to the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-way), as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.

5. No solid perimeter wall greater than 36 inches in height shall be oriented to
and located within 30 feet of the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-
way), as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The developer shall provide traffic calming to slow vehicle traffic exiting the
property with specific regard to pedestrian safety on the public sidewalk, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. The developer shall provide a minimum of two direct and accessible pedestrian
connections from the amenity areas located south of the building mass to the
shared use path along the Grand Canal Trail, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The developer shall provide and maintain the following bicycle infrastructure as



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 362
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021

described below and as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

a. A bicycle repair station (fix-it station) along the southern edge of the
site, visible, and accessible from the public sidewalk and / or the Grand
Canal Trail. The station shall include but not limited to: standard repair
tools affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair
stand which allows pedals and wheels to spin freely while adjusting the
bike.

b. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H.6.d
of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

c. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at
a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 spaces near
entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements of Section
1306.H. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

9. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

10. This parcel is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) called Zone A, on panel
1740 L of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) dated October 16, 2013. The
following requirements shall apply, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. The Architect/Engineer is required to show the floodplain boundary
limits on the Grading and Drainage plan and ensure that impacts to the
proposed facilities have been considered, following the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) Regulations (44 CFR Paragraph 60.3); this
includes, but not limited to provisions in the latest versions of the
Floodplain Ordinance of the Phoenix City Code.

b. A copy of the Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the
Floodplain Management section of Public Works Department for review
and approval of Floodplain requirements.

c. The developer shall provide a FEMA approved CLOMR-F or CLOMR
prior to issuance of a Grading and Drainage permit.

11. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 363
Alhambra Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
January 26, 2021

according to the templates and instructions provided which have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

12. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix for the site, per the content and form prescribed by the City Attorney
prior to final site plan approval.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 364
Attachment D


REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
February 4, 2021

ITEM NO: 13
DISTRICT NO.: 4
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-56-20-4
Location: Southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street
From: R-3 and R-5
To: WU Code T5:5 UT
Acreage: 3.29
Proposal: Multifamily residential
Applicant: Trinsic Residential Group, T. Gosselink
Owner: Donor Network of Arizona
Representative: Jason Morris , Withey Morris, PLC

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Alhambra 1/26/2021 Approval, per the staff recommendation. Vote: 15-1.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the Alhambra Village Planning
Committee recommendation, with an additional stipulation.

Motion Discussion: Commissioner Howard made a MOTION to approve Z-56-20-4, per
the Alhambra Village Planning Committee recommendation, with an additional
stipulation as read into the record.

Commissioner McCabe seconded.

Chairwoman Shank asked if there was any questions or comments.

Commissioner Busching made a substitute motion to continue Z-56-20-4.

Chairwoman Shank asked for a second. There was no second, therefore the motion
failed.

Motion details: Commissioner Howard made a MOTION to approve Z-56-20-4, per the
Alhambra Village Planning Committee recommendation, with an additional stipulation as
read into the record.

Maker: Howard
Second: McCabe
Vote: 7-1 (Busching)
Absent: Johnson
Opposition Present: Yes




Page 365
Findings:

1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of
Residential 15+ Dwelling Units Per Acre and the TOD Strategic Policy
Framework Minor Urban Center Place Type designation.

2. The development advances the vision and recommendations contained in the
Uptown Transit Oriented Development Plan and will support pedestrian
oriented development near the light rail and multiple urban bikeways.

3. The proposal will create additional housing options for the significant number
of residents in the Uptown TOD District.

Stipulations:

1. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
incorporate Walkable Urban Code Frontage Types described in Section 1305
for a minimum 40 percent of the building face(s), as approved by the Planning
and Development Department. For the purpose applying the above provisions,
the above shall be treated as a Secondary Frontage with regard to glazing.

2. The south facing mass of the building(s) oriented to the Grand Canal shall
contain architectural embellishments, design detailing, and / or space
programming to activate and provide visual access onto the canal, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department. Examples of
appropriate enhancements may include textural changes, offsets, recesses,
variation in window size and location, overhang canopies, balconies with a
depth greater of than 3 feet, and amenities such as gathering spaces.

3. Between the southern mass of the building and the south property line (the
Grand Canal right-of-way), the developer shall plant minimum 3-inch caliper,
large canopy shade trees, at a minimum frequency of 25 feet on center or in
equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

4. The provisions of Section 1310.A.2 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance shall
apply to require shaded open space of which a minimum 50 percent shall be
situated adjacent to the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-way), as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.

5. No solid perimeter wall greater than 36 inches in height shall be oriented to
and located within 30 feet of the south property line (the Grand Canal right-of-
way), as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The developer shall provide traffic calming to slow vehicle traffic exiting the
property with specific regard to pedestrian safety on the public sidewalk, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

7. The developer shall provide a minimum of two direct and accessible pedestrian
connections from the amenity areas located south of the building mass to the




Page 366
shared use path along the Grand Canal Trail, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The developer shall provide and maintain the following bicycle infrastructure as
described below and as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

a. A bicycle repair station (fix-it station) along the southern edge of the
site, visible, and accessible from the public sidewalk and / or the
Grand Canal Trail. The station shall include but not limited to:
standard repair tools affixed to the station; a tire gauge and pump;
and a bicycle repair stand which allows pedals and wheels to spin
freely while adjusting the bike.

b. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section
1307.H.6.d of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured
parking.

c. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be
provided at a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of
50 spaces near entrances of buildings and installed per the
requirements of Section 1306.H. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

9. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

10. This parcel is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) called Zone A, on panel
1740 L of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) dated October 16, 2013. The
following requirements shall apply, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department:

a. The Architect/Engineer is required to show the floodplain boundary
limits on the Grading and Drainage plan and ensure that impacts to
the proposed facilities have been considered, following the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Regulations (44 CFR Paragraph
60.3); this includes, but not limited to provisions in the latest
versions of the Floodplain Ordinance of the Phoenix City Code.

b. A copy of the Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the
Floodplain Management section of Public Works Department for
review and approval of Floodplain requirements.

c. The developer shall provide a FEMA approved CLOMR-F or
CLOMR prior to issuance of a Grading and Drainage permit.

11. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be




Page 367
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

12. The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of
Phoenix for the site, per the content and form prescribed by the City Attorney
prior to final site plan approval.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER
SHALL EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE
WAIVER SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE INCLUDED
IN THE REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Tamra Ingersoll at (602) 534-6648, TTY use 7-1-1.




Page 368
Attachment E




Page 369
Page 370
Page 371
155-34-051 155-34-049 155-34-011 155-34-008
155-34-119 155-34-087A
155-34-118
155-34-050 155-34-048 155-34-010 155-34-009
I 155-34-117 155-34-116 155-34-155 155-34-088

155-34-046 155-34-045 155-34-007 155-34-004
155-34-104
155-34-115 155-34-114
155-34-084
155-34-047 155-34-044 155-34-006 155-34-005
0 155-34-113 155-34-112
155-34-107
HAZELWOOD ST

Legend
155-34-002
Signed Petition
50 155-34-041
155-34-042 155-34-003
MINNEZONA AVE
155-34-086
155-34-111A 155-34-108A
Lots/Tracts/Condos

155-34-105
Zoning Petition Area

155-34-043 155-34-040 155-34-001
155-34-085

100 Feet
Proposed Amendment Area

3RD AVE

155-29-078D 155-29-078E
155-29-077C
155-29-004A
155-29-003
155-29-079
155-29-001 155-29-002
155-29-076

VALERIE PL
155-29-005A
155-29-071 155-29-070
155-29-068B

155-29-006A
155-29-073A
Attachment F
155-29-072
155-29-009 155-29-008A
155-29-007A


155-29-012A
155-29-066A 155-29-065
155-29-011A
155-29-013A 155-29-067A
155-29-064
2ND DR
COOLIDGE ST

155-29-132A

155-29-060B
155-29-010A 155-29-017A
155-29-060C
155-29-014A
# of Lots/Tracts/Condos:155-29-019A
15/19 = 79%

155-29-015A
3/4 VOTE REQUIRED
155-29-016A

Petition Verification Map 155-29-059A 155-29-061 HIGHLAND AVE

155-29-021A 155-29-069B
155-29-018 155-29-020A
155-29-055A 155-29-056
prepared




2ND AVE
% Area = 2.61ac./8.80ac. = 30%
155-29-022A 155-29-054D 155-29-053B
for Z-56-20-4
Map Page

372 by City of Phoenix, Planning and Development Services Dept. 2/12/2021




155-29-025A
155-29-026A 155-29-024A
155-29-023A
CITY OF PHOENIX
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT


FORM TO REQUEST PC to CC
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE CC HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON:
MARCH 3, 2021

APPLICATION NO/ Z-56-20-4 (SIGNATURE ON ORIGINAL IN FILE)
LOCATION Southeast corner of opposition x applicant
3rd Avenue and
Coolidge Street
Phoenix, AZ 85013 PC 2/4/2021 308 West Coolidge Street
Phoenix, AZ 85013

PC DATE STREET/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
TO PC/CC CC 3/3/2021
HEARING Ron Szematowicz
602-748-5607
Pjharveytrack12@yahoo.com

CC DATE NAME / PHONE / EMAIL
REASON FOR REQUEST:

Petition for Three Quarter Vote on Rezoning Case No. Z-56-20-4. (Sent via email February
11, 2021.)


RECEIVED BY: Racelle Escolar RECEIVED ON: 2/11/2021


Alan Stephenson
Joshua Bednarek
Tricia Gomes
Racelle Escolar
Stephanie Vasquez
Leah Swanton
Vikki Cipolla-Murillo
Danielle Jordan
Ra’Desha Williams
Village Planner
Samantha Keating
Paul M. Li
GIS
Applicant




Page 373
From: Racelle Escolar
To: RS
Cc: dillon.hall.mtaz@gmail.com; Victoria C Murrillo
Subject: FW: 3/4 City Council Petition Signatures
Date: Thursday, February 11, 2021 2:29:42 PM
Attachments: 34 City Council Petition Signatures with Icon.pdf
34 City Council Petition Signatures Page 2 with Ron Carpenter of 302 W Minnezona.pdf
Mark Daniels, GG ICON LLC.pdf
Importance: High


Hello Ron,

I have received your request for a ¾ vote on Rezoning Case No. Z-56-20-4. We will process this and
let you know if a ¾ vote will be required.

Thanks,

Racelle Escolar, AICP
Planner III

Planning and Development Department
Planning Division
(602) 534-2864


From: R S
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 2:17 PM
To: Racelle Escolar
Cc: dillon.hall.mtaz@gmail.com
Subject: 3/4 City Council Petition Signatures

Hello Racelle

Attached are two pages of signatures including the Icon next door to the proposed project. With the Icon,
I think we have should have covered our 20% land and we are over 75% of land owners I believe. Thank
you. I cc'ed Dillon in case there is anything else you need today.


Ron




Page 374
Page 375
Page 376
To whom it may concern:

Goodman Real Estate has been contracted to provide Asset Management
services to Icon On Central (entity name – GG ICON LLC) located at 77 West
Coolidge Street, Phoenix, AZ 85013. As the Investment Portfolio Manager
assigned to Icon On Central I am responsible to act as agent for ownership for all
issues pertaining to the Icon on Central property. If you have any questions I can
be reached at the contact info listed below.

Sincerely,


Mark Daniels | Investment Portfolio Manager
GOODMAN REAL ESTATE
8400 Normandale Lake Blvd.| Suite 920 | Bloomington, MN 55438
M: 952.451.1206
mdaniels@goodmanre.com |www.goodmanre.com




Page 377
Attachment G

From: pamlperry@cox.net pamlperry@cox.net
To: Nick Klimek
Subject: rezone 3.29 acres located at the southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street
Date: Monday, January 25, 2021 2:55:26 PM




Alhambra Village Planning Committee

Regarding: 7. Z-56-20-4: Presentation, discussion, and possible recommendation regarding a
request to rezone 3.29 acres located at the southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and
Coolidge Street from R-3 (Multifamily Residence District) and R-5 (Multifamily
Residence District) to WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:5,
Transit Uptown Character Area) to allow multifamily residential.
The Planning Commission will consider this request on February 4, 2021.

The proposed zoning change requested by developers to meet WU code benefits for the
property that used to be known as the donor network site will indeed justify the time and
money spent developing this code. However, the changes proposed fail to meet a walkable
urban situation for residents along Coolidge street. The development would be more
appropriate along a main thoroughfare with existing sidewalks and perhaps even bike lanes.
Density of this level is also questionable in a neighborhood already afforded zoning for level
commercial residential 3 and 5 which was in place when the neighborhood was registered on
The National Historic Register.

The largest concern voiced by residents is generally described as ‘traffic’. To be sure we
understand and observe daily the increased ratio of cars to driveway parking available or
even cars to designed, planned parking in recent multi-unit developments.   Streets are
parked bumper to bumper: vehicles, both sides. Cyclists, pedestrians, runners, dog
walkers, baby strollers all use active traffic lanes. Delivery vehicles are forced to
double park… access for police, ambulance fire equipment is limited and restricted.
Traffic is sometimes defined as the number of trips in and out of a property. More and
more this traffic includes all sorts of deliveries. Currently neighbors are delivered of
something more than half a dozen times a day. Multiply that by two hundred and too
many units! The driveway for this property becomes ingress/ egress for hundreds of
deliveries and an increasingly noticeable traffic hazard for cyclists, pedestrians, dog
walker, toddlers on tiny bikes, moms with strollers…
It is projected that development residents will avail themselves to grand canalscape
project and light rail as a means of going places, but for those excursions to retail
opportunities (some not so very far, but not on canal or train lines) and others when
delivery is not used, people make trips in their cars. Their guests park where there is
space…increased vehicle trips, count them again!
There are limited sidewalks on Coolidge Street. All bike, pedestrian, dog walkers,
children waiting for busses, yes, this will happen again, runners, children going to
school, (there are several proximate), stroller-brigade, toddlers on tiny bikes with
training wheels and parents following along slowly along at decreased rates of speed to
supervise, or just folks going out for a meal or coffee must walk in the street. They run
the gamut along both sides of the thoroughfare of stationary parking, travel lanes
cluttered with delivery vehicles, moving vans, ubers and other gig parcel and package
delivery, trash collectors, city vehicles, cut thru traffic as well as locals simply arriving,
or leaving their homes exiting driveways… . This hardly qualifies as “WALKABLE”.
It will be a very unsafe and not walkable district.


Page 378
Extracting a vehicle from a driveway with sight line impeded by what becomes double
parked vehicles (only for a moment, let me drop off this package…) living in the
neighborhood becomes less and less conducive to personal safety: pedestrians and
vehicles two or 4 wheeled.

Who knows what sort of lurkers find all this stationary parking a good place to while away
time waiting to steal packages delivered or spring on unsuspecting victims…? Is this
“WALKABLE” ? Or Safe? Calls for service by fire trucks, ambulances, and police are all
impeded.

Your developer is investing client’s dollars. He wants to make them a good return, but does
this need to be at the expense of livability in an Historic District? Current zoning may be dated
to earlier planning goals, but perhaps they better reflects the multiple uses of pedestrian,
bicycle and automotive traffic that prevail in our ever-denser central core. Walking and biking
along Coolidge are a chancy thing sometimes already. Let’s not go out our way to make it
worse.

Thank you, Pam Perry 304 W. Coolidge St.

P.S. In case this is not clear, I do not support these rezoning efforts for the old donor network
property!




Page 379
From: RS
To: Nick Klimek
Subject: Rezoning effort at Coolidge and 3rd Ave(Meeting Jan 26th... Item: 126 771 4317)
Date: Monday, January 25, 2021 2:49:22 PM



There is a rezoning effort happening within my neighborhood at 3rd Ave and Coolidge St. I
beg you not to allow the zoning change as it will deeply affect the traffic and parking in the
neighborhood as well as a create a hazard on the 3rdAve bike path.  I am not against the
project as much as I am against the increase in units.  Its too much added traffic and parking
into the neighborhood.  Please hear me out.

The developers are trying to increase zoning from the current R3-R5 to a WU which would
basically allow and 4+ story building increase from about 137 units to 213ish.  This apartment
complex would be situated in the  middle of the historic neighborhood rather than on a major
road (like Camelback or Central).  Currently standing in the proposed space is an office
building (formerly Organ Donors) with a private park that the neighborhood has enjoyed for
the 20+ years I have lived here.  The proposed project is at the corner of 3rd Ave and Coolidge
along the canal which coincides with the 3rdAve bike path.

Before covid, I enjoyed walking to businesses and watering hole landmarks but I still
owned a vehicle the entire time as most residents do.  While walkability is an important tool
for those of us that live in the neighborhood, most of us still need to drive to work or the store
or to get out of town.  Just because people walk occasionally does not mean that they do not
own a vehicle and use it.    On top of that, this apartment complex will be very close to the
sidewalk (like Elevation) on a neighborhood street not having the same easement houses are
required.  The front of end of the complex will face the canal while we in the neighborhood
get its backside.  We need easement within our neighborhood.  I understand the importance of
city growth, but cities that grow need to also ensure there is ample green space for the
congested masses living within such areas.  If nothing else give us that easement.

If you look at other apartment complexes in the area such as the Pavilions (Campbell and
Central), Elevation (Coolidge and Central), the Station (Central and Monterosa), you will see
cars constantly parked along the road day and night even with ample parking garages.  It
creates a hazardous congestion and unsightly view of the neighborhood.  Since Elevation was
built here on Coolidge and Central, the traffic on Coolidge St has increased with drivers flying
down the street even with speed bumps.  We also have a constant problem of cars stopping to
load or unload dangerously close to Central.  There is nothing to stop the proposed
development from having irresponsible parking and traffic from inundating the
neighborhood.  The increase in variance is going to add more cars and more
congestion.  Elevation is attractive on the website and from Central Ave but from Coolidge St
is a block monstrosity right on top of the sidewalk with a parking garage and a bunch of
parked cars all around it.  There is nothing attractive about it from Coolidge St.

While I understand I cannot stop the development nor do I necessarily want to, I just want the
city council to understand this complex is going directly into the neighborhood and has no
direct access to a major through street (like Central and Camelback).  It must cut through this
neighborhood.  The developers will try to sell to you people won't need a car, but I implore
you to look at the parking around the apartment complexes I have mentioned.  Its
Phoenix.  Most people own vehicles.  We in the neighborhood are already having to sacrifice
this private park that added much charm and use to an otherwise busy area in Phoenix but an


Page 380
additional 75 units will not help us maintain control of neighborhood streets or the added
congestion of parking.

Sincerely

Ron Szematowicz

home owner living at 308 W Coolidge St

pjharveytrack12@yahoo.com




Page 381
From: frank paoletti
To: Nick Klimek
Subject: Rezoning Z-56-20-4
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 10:14:16 AM




Why has the zoning change for the area at 3rd Ave and Coolidge St now state there are to be 165 units minimum to
no maximum. This is not what the developer and lawyer stated in our neighborhood meeting. Also, what about the
parking, no one has ever addressed that and no one from the city has come to see the congestion at the end of
Coolidge St because of the other 2 apartment buildings? Nothing has been done with that problem that already
exists. Will 3rd Ave and Coolidge St have no street parking signs along with fines for violating the parking rules?
Thank you,
Frank Paoletti
449 W. Coolidge St




Page 382
Racelle Escolar

From: gbvalladao@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 12:49 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Opposition to Case #13 Z-56-20-4



I write in opposition to the rezoning application hearing for rezoning 3rd Avenue & Collidge from R‐5/R‐3 zoning to
Walkable Urban Code zoning. While I am not opposed to the development of the site, it should be within the confines
of it’s current zoning. I oppose the request for the following reasons:

 Pierson Place is one of the few historic neighborhoods in the urban core and Central/Uptown Phoenix and
fabric of it should be preserved if at all possible
 WC Code T5:5T was intended for high traffic urban mixed‐use districts with retail/office/dining uses like Central
Avenue, not the middle of a residential historic neighborhood. Even if a rezone is allowed it should be limited
to either:
o T3:2 since it is a residential neighborhood with single family homes and duplexes with a maximum
height of 30 feet
o T4:3 an area characterized by single and multi‐family residences with a maximum height of 40 feet.
 The 3rd Avenue & Coolidge location is a quiet dead end street that was never intended to accommodate the
heavy vehicular traffic the project will generate. While a traffic study has repeatedly been referenced, it has
not been shared with the neighborhood.
 The developer request to increase the unit count from the currently zoned 136 to 218 adds 80 units to the
project increasing the unit count by 59% with no justification as to why it is needed.
 Increasing the height limitations from 48 feet to 56 feet will impair the sunlight on the north side of Coolidge as
well as impede the southern site lines for homes throughout the neighborhood.
 Overflow parking from a project this size will spill into the single family homes on Coolidge, Hazelwood and 3rd
avenue which is can be witnessed daily on the streets adjacent to The Elevations on Central, The Icon and the
Lexington.

Again, I am not opposed to development of the site, but there is no reason a project should be built beyond the
currently zoning requirements which allows for 136 units and 48 feet of height on the R‐5 zoned parcels.

I thank you for your consideration.

Regards – Greg Valladao

Greg Valladao
VALCOR Commercial
602‐697‐0078

Sent from Mail [go.microsoft.com] for Windows 10




Page1 383
Racelle Escolar

From: pamlperry@cox.net pamlperry@cox.net
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 12:58 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: case number Z-56-20-4



Planning Committee

The proposed zoning change requested by developers to meet WU code benefits for the property that used to be known
as the donor network site will indeed justify the time and money spent developing this code. However, the changes
proposed fail to make a walkable urban situation for all residents along Coolidge street. The WU development would
certainly be more appropriate along a main thoroughfare Camelback, Central,7th Ave. with existing sidewalks and
perhaps even bike lanes.

Pierson Place Historic District neighborhood already is afforded zoning for commercial residential 3 and 5 which was in
place when the neighborhood was registered on The National Historic Register. Other in‐fil developers are expected to
use these parameters.

Your developer is investing client’s dollars. He wants to make them a good return, but does this need to be at the
expense of walkability in an Historic District? Current zoning may be dated to earlier planning goals, but perhaps they
better reflect the multiple uses of pedestrian, bicycle and automotive traffic that prevail in our ever‐denser central
core. Walking and biking along Coolidge are a chancy thing sometimes already. Let’s not go out our way to make it
worse.

the frequently cited developers of proposed and existing multi‐family projects will not be afforded the privilege of WU
code benefits, having to work withing current zoning. Any developer can add gates to fencing along the canal to avail
residents to easy access to that local feature. Gates in fences is not rocket science for WU code developers only. There
is little excuse to make special exceptions for this project.

The major concern voiced by residents is generally described as ‘traffic’. We understand and observe daily the increased
street parking. Streets are parked bumper to bumper: vehicles, both sides. Cyclists, pedestrians, runners, dog walkers,
baby strollers all use active traffic lanes. Delivery vehicles are forced to double park… access for police, ambulance fire
equipment become more and more limited and restricted. We are seeing increasing numbers of auto related crime as
well.

 There are limited sidewalks on Coolidge Street. All bike, pedestrian, dog walkers, children waiting for busses,
yes, this will happen again, runners, children going to school, (there are several proximate), stroller‐brigade,
toddlers on tiny bikes with training wheels and parents following along slowly along at decreased rates of speed
to supervise, or just folks going out for a meal or coffee must walk in the street. They run the gamut along both
sides of the thoroughfare of stationary parking, travel lanes cluttered with delivery vehicles, moving vans, ubers
and other gig parcel and package delivery, trash collectors, city vehicles, cut thru traffic as well as locals simply
arriving, or leaving their homes exiting driveways… . This hardly qualifies as “WALKABLE”. It will be a very
unsafe and not walkable district.
 Extracting a vehicle from a driveway with sight line impeded by double parked vehicles (only for a moment, let
me drop off this package…) living in the neighborhood becomes less and less conducive to personal safety:
pedestrians and vehicles two or 4 wheeled.
 Who knows what sort of lurkers find all this stationary parking a good place to while away time waiting to steal
packages delivered, break into parked cars, or spring on unsuspecting victims…? Is this “WALKABLE” ? Or Safe?
We are already seeing increased crime in automobiles parked along the east end of Coolidge, and this can be
expected to move west with parked cars!
 Calls for service by fire trucks, ambulances, and police are all impeded.

Page1 384
Thank you, Pam Perry 304 W. Coolidge St.

P.S. In case this is not clear, I do not support these rezoning efforts for the old donor network property!




Page2 385
Racelle Escolar

From: Monica Kearns
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 2:22 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Rezoning case No.Z-56-20-4 WU code T5: 5 UT



good afternoon, regardless this Project we are on opposition, no only the time that will take to build 24 months, we are
families who has to work and we want to rest after work and on our days off too,but also the traffic, our privacy,
because those apartments will face at our houses and when the highschools open again it will be a big, big problem of
traffic I am talking about 2 highschools beside businesses around and other traffic, we are concern about people will
parking on front of our houses specially on the weekends, the noise of the traffic, this is a HISTORIC DISTRICT and we
want to keep this neighborhood that way, WE DONT WANT MORE APARTMENTS AROUND, I INVITE YOU TO STAY ONE
DAY LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC ON CENTRAL AVE, CAMELBACK RD AND 7 AV. we are living here, we see it every day, I
hope we all from this neighborhood hope to consider our petition to not to build more apartments.


Thank for your time, sincerely:

MM.




Page1 386
Racelle Escolar

From: R S
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 9:29 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Rezoning on Coolidge St and 3rd Ave 56-20-4 item 13
Attachments: project 56-20-4 is the Red boxed area.png



To the Phoenix Planning Commission,

I ask you to consider the gravity of the zoning change on case 56-20-4 in this Thursday’s
agenda. The property in question is not on a major thoroughfare, but deep within the historic
Pierson Place neighborhood.

The developers are asking to go from a R3-R5 to a WU because the site in question is on the
canal. While that is true, the area of the canal that the said project would be built on is relatively
small. It is only four to five historic house properties long. In return they want to increase units
from 137 to about 215, which comes out to 275 beds (as there are two bedroom units), increase the
height to 56’ in the middle of the neighborhood, have next to no easement on the street and not
supply adequate parking. On top of that, the project would not face the neighborhood. We would
get its backside. I have attached a copy of a map of the said property.

Please take the time to go the site and inspect the canal area, the bike path and the neighborhood
and you will see this is too great a sacrifice on height, easement, traffic and parking for the limited
canal scaping they will accomplish. Let them use their already in place R3-R5 zoning to help ease
traffic congestion and parking overflow.

Please vote NO on the said project. It will irreversibly hurt the historic neighborhood in which will
reside within. Again it is not on a major street, Camelback, 7th Ave and Central are all a good
distance away and 3rd Ave does not cut through for purposes of limiting traffic.

Sincerely

Ron Szematowicz

home owner living at 308 W Coolidge St

pjharveytrack12@yahoo.com
602-748-5607




Page1 387
Page 388
Racelle Escolar

From: Thomas Rice
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 3:16 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Reasoning Case No Z-56-20-4



Hello,

My name is Thomas Rice; I live at 320 W Hazelwood St. I am writing this letter to oppose the zoning change from R‐3 and
R‐5 to WU Code T5:5 UT. I oppose this for the following reasons:

Not enough parking

Intrudes on Pierson Place Historic Neighborhood

Insufficient access

Takes away a green space in the neighborhood

Too congested

Thank you for your time!

Thomas D. Rice
Owner/Operator
Javelina Tree Work LLC
480‐208‐1974




Page1 389
Racelle Escolar

From: grosso9377@cox.net
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 3:34 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Oppsition to 56-20-4



To whom it concern (Phoenix Planning Commission),

My name is Michael Grosso, owner of the property at 303 W Coolidge. I am in opposition of the planning and zoning of
the proposed property at 3 ave. and Coolidge.

My concerns are:

1. 218 unit complex built on the edges of Coolidge and 3 ave, to large of a footprint for the area.

2. The building will not allow any parking on Coolidge or limited which turns the street into a single lane
road. Dangerous for riding bikes and walking.

3. Increases the walking traffic and more chance for crime.

4. Coolidge Ave. is a cut‐through for 7 ave to Central, which could be dangerous for residents.

5. The community is going to suffer with all the added walking traffic.




Thank You for you time please do not rezone the location.




Page1 390
Racelle Escolar

From: Jeff Rahm
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 4:41 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: RE Application #: Z-56-20-4



Attn Planning Commission:
I own a home (306 West Coolidge) just down the street from the proposed apartment development site.
While I am all for growth & expansion, I have reservations with the proposed WU rezone. I foresee a
heavy increase in vehicular traffic, especially on Coolidge, Hazelwood & Highland. Central Ave only allows for a
right turn heading south. To travel north, the only option is to drive to 7th Ave on either street and make a
right. Again, I am all for growth, but just want to be sure that the traffic congestion issue is carefully
considered.
Thank you,
Jeff Rahm

Jeff Rahm • Sr. Digital Media Planner/Buyer
To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft Office prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
OH Partners




o. 602.228.2377
OHPARTNERS.COM [ohpartners.com]
[ohpartners.com]




Page1 391
Racelle Escolar

From: Sarah Simpson
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 4:53 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Rezoning Case No: Z-56-20-4



Hello! I am a resident at 308 W. Hazlewood St. and I am writing to request a reduction in the size of the multifamily
residential dwelling that is planned for the Southeast corner of 3rd avenue and Coolidge. Case Z‐56‐20. Please reduce
the size to 80 units. Please let me know if you have any questions!

‐Sarah Simpson
(602)405‐6943




Page1 392
Racelle Escolar

From: Bill Wells
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 5:15 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Opposition to Application No. Z-56-20-4



I am opposed to Application No. Z‐56‐20‐4 to change the zoning from R‐3 and R‐5 to WU Code T5:5 UT located on the
Southeast corner of 3rd Avenue and Coolidge Street for several reasons including:

a) constructing a multifamily residential property with no maximum units allowed will significantly increase the traffic on
3 residential streets (Coolidge, Hazelwood, and 3rd Avenue)
b) increased traffic will increase the likelihood of pedestrian getting harmed as this is primarily a residential area
consisting of families with children and older adults
c) Other than a standard size sidewalk along the eastern edge of 3rd Avenue there is no public sidewalk on Coolidge,
Hazelwood, and other nearby residential streets. The proposal is an extremely dangerous mix of increased pedestrian
traffic walking in the street and an increase in vehicle traffic
d) Access to and from the Grand Canal pathway is from 3rd Avenue and Hazelwood which already stresses the
pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area
e) Increasing the population density within the area will increase levels of crime and lower public safety
f) Parking along Hazelwood, Coolidge, and other nearby residential streets is restricted but does not appear to be
enforced. Additional residents and vehicles will take advantage of unauthorized street parking.

Until such time as the proponent can provide studies that these reasons have been addressed in their proposal or
provide mitigation measures to offset or compensate for this reasons, I am opposed to this application.

Regards,

Bill Wells
498 W Hazelwood St
Phoenix, AZ 85013
bdtgwells@icloud.com




Page1 393
Racelle Escolar

From: Lina Money
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 5:53 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Opposition / 56-20-4, item 13




Zoning case 56‐20‐4. Item 13.

Dear Sir and Madam,

I am deeply troubled to know that there is a high possibility of a new build of apartment complex in our small historic
neighborhood, which we the neighbors have been in charge of making it better, cleaner , more safe and friendlier place
to live. My family and I have been living on Coolidge st since 2007 and we have been part of the transitions in the hood.
I have two small kids and two dogs, as a mother I am very concern of rezoning the corner lot and allowing some Texan
investor developer to make money from the work we did all these years (to maintain and make it a better
neighbourhood) without being considerate to the people and pets in the Pierson Place. We as human have
responsibilities to make life better for all and not just for one company!!! Life is not all about money and we have to
make the right steps to protect each other and not to allow this rezoning!
I deeply ask you to view this case as a person who lives in Pierson Place and not just as an outsider.
If they are allowed to build they should be limited to the current zoning and they should provide place ( trees, green
grass , play area for the families in the neighborhood. We are already overwhelmed by cars parked on the side walks and
fast drivers and lets not forget that 3 ave has a bike lane used by many to commute . It will put a lot of people in
danger!
This letter represents the families living at 510, 505 and 506 W Coolidge Street!

Yours truly,
Lina Money
Tania Bachelot
Olga Pegkova


Lina Money




Page1 394

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

64 item(s)